Mr President March 2002, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it is effectively eEurope that is in the hot seat this evening, if I may say so, and I shall in particular address the full roll-out of third-generation mobile communications. The debate has been very poorly organised, Commissioner, for we began with the Van Velzen report, which is mainly complementary insofar as it concerns information that will be added to third-generation GSMs, such as meteorological information or information on roads provided by the public sector. All things considered, it does not matter very much since, furthermore, the aim of third-generation GSMs is also to avoid the digital divide, which Mr Paasilinna will strongly criticise. All in all, therefore, it is perfectly normal for us to have this kind of joint debate. It should perhaps be pointed out that the March 2002 Barcelona Council stated: ‘Technological convergence affords all business and citizens new opportunities for access to the Information Society. Digital television and third-generation mobile communications (3G) will play a key role in providing widespread access to interactive services’. This sector of the third generation, however, seems to be in difficulties. Perhaps, in order to avoid the digital divide and to avoid breaking the continuity of eEurope, it should be said that 3G services must be established within a global framework, but we must also add the important issues of consumer health and environmental quality. We must also learn from the experience of the current GSM market in order to avoid reproducing the mistakes that might have been made in the past. One key aspect of mobile telephony development is the interoperability of terminals. In this area, the Commission would point out that progress was made in the development of 3G terminals in 2002. The first models are ready. They are also ready in China, and I am pointing this out to you because we received this information last week. Furthermore, the existing 2G networks have been modernised to make them 2.5G. Some technical problems may persist, but we can say that everything is working. With regard to the market situation, the current availability of 3G services in Europe is not clear. They are available in Japan, but the operators are confident, and, after all, since around 50 operators are capable of offering these services, the problem of competition is solved. It can exist. With regard to regulatory issues, the Commission would point out that the procedure for granting 3G licences has begun in all the countries of the European Union. This number of licences is sufficient. There is therefore no problem as far as the competitive environment is concerned. Following discussions with the parties concerned with the introduction of 3G mobile communications, a consensus was reached on three points. First of all, the introduction phase for 3G services does not require legislative intervention. Market forces must be allowed to take effect. Secondly, 3G communications will, in the long term, have to become one of the platforms for services provided by a global Information Society. Lastly, the public authorities must provide constant support in the introduction process. Three factors have therefore been identified: a stable, harmonised, transparent regulatory environment, taking account of consumer interests; the proactive supporting role that the Union can play and, thirdly, long-term initiatives, taking account of what has happened in the 3G communications sector, in particular with a view to enlargement. We therefore need to increase coordination of all these decisions. The Commission believes that no changes will be required in the granting of licences and that the period of validity of licences will not be altered in the short term. The legislation does, however, require clarification in terms of network infrastructure sharing. As rapporteur, I therefore feel that the Commission has judged the matter correctly in terms of the economy, but that a number of points should have been added. This technology is expensive and could be rivalled, for example, by WiFi, which means that today, it is not clear whether 3G communications will take over part of what information technology is currently doing or if, on the contrary, information technology will gradually replace what GSMs are doing. Ultimately, it is the market that will decide, but it is good to raise the question and be prepared. Generally speaking, access to 3G services must be clear to all and users with difficulties must be protected; for example, children and people with disabilities might need specific packages. Lastly, secure payment must be protected, or the consumer will have no confidence in this system. I shall now discuss the precautionary principle, which Members from the right, furthermore, wanted to dispose of. I want to discuss the health problems that can arise, for they are now raised by numerous scientists. A consensual request was made that the requirements of the World Health Organisation should at least be respected at European level. We are told that this is now the case, but it still remains to be verified. Lastly, the construction of 3G aerial repeaters should take place with due respect for the environment and land use planning. The Member States will ensure that authorisations from the land use planning departments are subject to a clear procedure and a public enquiry. Four to sixteen times more aerials are needed for third-generation communications than for 2G. Colocation or aerial sharing, as recommended by the Commission, is therefore extremely important. In conclusion, regulatory stability will enable this technology to develop smoothly if the European Union gives the same importance to social and environmental parameters as to economic parameters.

Political group: Verts-ALE