5.

Considers that the aspects to be considered in a review of the entire regulatory framework should include: (i) the overdue review of the universal service obligation, including the obligation to offer broadband internet access at a fair price in response to the urgent need to reduce the digital divide, and in doing so mitigate the constraints imposed by state aid guidelines; (ii) the competence of NRAs for all issues, including spectrum, that are addressed by the framework; the powers granted to the NRAs in the Member States and the scope of the NRA independence requirement, accordingly; (iii) cooperation between the NRAs and national competition authorities; (iv) the symmetric obligations relating to network access (Article 12 FD), since in certain Member States such regulatory powers were not given to NRAs; (v) the rules on leverage effects (Article 14 FD) and joint dominance (Annex II FD), since despite the 2009 amendments the NRAs still find those tools difficult to use; (vi) the market review processes; (vii) the impact of services that are fully substitutable to those provided by traditional providers; in certain cases clarifications regarding the reach of the framework’s technological neutrality would be needed, as would clarifications on the dichotomy between services in the ‘information society’ bracket and those in the ‘electronic communications’ bracket; (viii) the necessity of abolishing redundant regulation; (ix) the lifting of regulation where a market analysis has shown the market concerned to be truly competitive and that ways and means exist for extended monitoring; (x) giving NRAs the opportunity to report on their experience with non-discrimination obligations and remedies; (xi) the effectiveness and workings of the Article 7/7a procedures (‘co-regulation’): while overall both the Commission and BEREC agree that they work well, allowing for a proper balancing, the former argues that in some cases NRAs did not adjust all their regulatory measures, or were slow to adapt them, and the latter complain of tight time constraints; (xii) the situation where phase II of the procedure is not triggered due to an NRA withdrawing its draft measure or where an NRA does not propose a remedy to a problem recognised on a certain market, in which case the only solution is an infringement procedure: for both such cases, a way to trigger a proper Article 7/7a procedure should exist; (xiii) the effectiveness and workings of the Article 19 procedure: the Commission used its Article 19 powers twice (the NGA recommendation in September 2010, and the recommendation on non-discrimination and costing methodologies); since unlike for Article 7/7a there is no timeframe for the Article 19 procedure, the regulatory dialogue between BEREC and the Commission was less smooth, leading to complaints from BEREC that its opinion was requested at very short notice, and from the Commission that certain NRAs were reluctant in the drafting and implementation period; (xiv) pan-European services and operators, taking into account the (unused) provision of Article 15(4) of the FD allowing the Commission to identify transnational markets; more focus should be given to the competitive provision of communications services to EU businesses and to the effective and consistent application of business grade remedies across the EU; (xv) identification of transnational markets, as a first step at least with respect to business services; enabling providers to notify BEREC that they intend to serve such markets, and supervision of providers serving such markets by BEREC; (xvi) BEREC and its functioning as well as the extension of the scope of its competences; (xvii) freedom of access to content for all, following Article 1(3a) of the Framework Directive, and net neutrality building on Article 8(4)(g) of the Framework Directive; (xviii) the recommendation on relevant markets; (xix) the regulation of equipment, including bundling of equipment and operating systems; (xx) recent global developments in cybersecurity and cyberespionage and the expectations of European citizens regarding respect of their privacy when using electronic communications and information society services, and (xxi) the fact that the internet has become a crucial infrastructure for conducting a wide array of economic and social activities;