Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the "Communication from the Commission — The results of the public consultation on the 1999 Communications Review and Orientations for the new Regulatory Framework"
Date: 2000-10-19
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: drafting of EU law, electronics industry, liberalisation of trade, provision of services, sample survey, telecommunications

16.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 14/35

3.3.1.
Up to now, JAR-OPS 1 has contained these refer-
ences. The Commission proposal would isolate the EU OPS
from the overall JAR scheme, which operates as a closed,
interlinked system.

3.4.
In failing to take account of Section 2 of JAR-OPS 1,
the Commission also fails in its objective of harmonising the
rules. Many of the additional requirements and limitations set
out in Section 2 of JAR-OPS 1 might be interpreted differently
by the national aviation authorities, and this would inevitably
lead to distortions of competition in the single market. Here,
the Committee sees a need for further regulation.

The Commission is asked to rectify the translation
3.6.
errors in order to secure the practical
implementation of
the paper as a whole. To prevent misunderstandings, the
Committee also proposes that the Commission paper make
greater use of the recognised technical terms employed in JAR-
OPS 1. Accordingly, the Committee feels it is advisable to stick
closely to the JAR-OPS 1 text (both the original English version
and the translations which already exist). Furthermore, the
Commission proposal should be based on JAR-OPS Change 1,
which is the most recent version and follows on from JAR-
OPS 1.

3.5. Moreover, the translations of the Commission proposal
differ — in some cases substantially — from JAR-OPS 1 and
contain errors. This must be rectified. That does not of course
apply to the passages from the JAR-OPS 1 text deliberately
omitted from the Commission proposal.

4.1.
The Committee feels it is essential to establish the
planned European Air Safety Authority (EASA) as quickly as
possible. This authority would then be able to issue all the
rules governing air traffic — including the EU OPS.

4.

Final observation

Brussels, 19 October 2000.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the Commission
— The results of the public consultation on the 1999 Communications Review and Orientations
for the new Regulatory Framework’

(2001/C 14/07)

On 2 May 2000 the Commission decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under
Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned communication.

The Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society, which was responsible for
preparing the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 8 September 2000. The
rapporteur was Mr Lagerholm.

At its 376th plenary session of 19 October 2000 the Economic and Social Committee adopted the
following opinion unanimously.

1.

The Commission communication

1.1.
The communication reports on the consultation associ-
ated with the 1999 Communications Review (1) and draws

(1) OJ C 204, 18.7.2000, p. 3.

conclusions with regard to the forthcoming proposals for the
new regulatory framework. Respondents held differing views
on, for instance, funding of national regulatory authorities, the
introduction of two thresholds for asymmetric obligations in
respect of access and interconnection, guidelines for afforda-
bility of universal services, and users’ facilities and quality of
service.

C 14/36

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

16.1.2001

1.2.
On the basis of the consultation, the Commission
concludes that the future regulatory framework will retain the
original proposals in all but one area. This area is access and
interconnection, where the Commission — in contrast with its
previously stated intention in the Review — has decided not
to introduce two thresholds for ex-ante regulation for strong
market players.

2. Comments

2.1.
The Economic and Social Committee appreciates the
way the Commission has chosen to prepare this important
legislation to drive forward the liberalisation of markets for
electronic communications. It is convinced that the broad
public consultation with more than 200 responses from a
wide range of different interests has significantly improved
the conditions for getting an efficient and widely accepted
regulatory regime implemented and invites the Commission
to have recourse to public consultations more often.

2.2.
Since the Commission presented its Communication
on the results of the consultation on the 1999 Communi-
cations Review and the orientations for the new regulatory
framework, the Economic and Social Committee has adopted
its Opinion on the Review (24 May 2000). The Opinion
endorses in principle the broad thrust of the Commission
proposal, but makes some specific comments on various
points and firmly objects to one point in particular: the
proposal to introduce two thresholds for ex-ante regulation
for strong market players.

Brussels, 19 October 2000.

2.3.
The Commission’s conclusions on the consultation
and its account of the deliberations which are to form the
blueprint for the proposals for a Directive providing the
revised regulatory framework for electronic communications
infrastructure and associated services, are fully in line with the
views expressed by the Committee in its Opinion.

The Committee is particularly pleased to note that the
2.4.
Commission has changed its mind about the thresholds for
ex-ante regulation, with an obligation on some players to meet
reasonable requests for access, at cost-oriented prices and on a
non-discriminatory basis.

The Committee is also pleased to note that

2.5.
the
Commission concludes from the consultation that other areas
which were subject to specific comments in the Committee
Opinion should in future be addressed in line with the
Committee’s recommendations.

2.6.
The Committee shares the Commission’s preoccu-
pation regarding the possible questioning of decisions taken
by the National Regulatory Authorities. The Commission
should have the possibility to require the NRAs to suspend
those decisions when they are not in line with the regulatory
framework.

2.7.
The Committee, in conformity with views expressed in
the public consultation, further considers it right that simple
complaint handling and dispute settlement procedures be in
place for users and consumers on a national and cross-border
level. The relevant powers and procedures should be attributed
to the NRAs’ and the High Level Communications Group.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS