WRITTEN QUESTION E-3272/00 by Francesco Turchi (UEN) to the Commission. UMTS licences.
Date: 2000-10-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: competition, mobile phone, private sector, public sector, trade licence

6.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 163 E/69

Reply

(12 February 2001)

The Honourable Member is referred to the reply given by the Council on 22 November 1999 to
Written Question E-1636/99 on the same subject (1).

Since that time the legal situation has not changed either at Community or international level.

(1) OJ C 170 E, 20.6.2000, p. 59.

(2001/C 163 E/071)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3272/00

by Francesco Turchi (UEN) to the Commission

(20 October 2000)

Subject: UMTS licences

The ever-expanding market in telecommunications is of great economic importance and UMTS licences are
crucial to the further development of this sector, as they represent the future of mobile telephony.

Various European Union governments have awarded UMTS licences on the basis of public auctions
organised by themselves rather than on the basis of rigorous scrutiny of the necessary documentation.

This has tended to result in UMTS licences being awarded to operators with significant public sector
involvement, as was the case in Italy, where Wind is controlled by ENEL, which in turn is controlled by the
Italian Ministry of the Treasury.

Does the Commission agree that this constitutes a distortion of the market and of competition, and what
measures does the Commission intend to take in response to this state of affairs?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(14 December 2000)

According to Article 295 (ex-Article 222) of the EC Treaty, (cid:145)this Treaty shall in no way prejudice the rules
in Member States governing the system of property ownership(cid:146). However, Article 86 (ex-Article 90),
paragraph 1, of the EC Treaty provides that in the case of public undertakings, Member States shall neither
enact nor maintain in force any measure contrary to the EC Treaty rules and in particular, to the
competition rules contained in Articles 81 to 89 (ex-Articles 85 to 94).

to the granting of

Furthermore, with respect
third generation mobile licences, neither Decision
No 128/1999 (1) nor any of the Community directives related to mobile services (2) and licensing (3)
requires Member States to adopt a specific licensing procedure (i.e. a comparative selection (cid:129) (cid:145)beauty
contest(cid:146) or a competitive bidding (cid:129) (cid:145)auction(cid:146)). However, Member States, when awarding third generation
mobile licences, are required to comply with the EC Treaty and a certain number of general principles of
Community law. In particular, the number of third generation mobile licences may be limited only for
reasons of demonstrated lack of frequency spectrum and licences should be granted on the basis of
objective, non-discriminatory, detailed and proportionate criteria.
In addition, when establishing such
licensing procedures Member States should give due weight to the need to maximise benefits for users
and to facilitate the development of competition.

C 163 E/70

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2001

Provided that the foregoing principles and the competition rules contained in Articles 81 to 89 of the
Treaty are complied with, the participation of public undertakings in the licensing procedures for the
award of third generation mobile licences does not constitute,
in itself, a distortion of competition.
Accordingly, Member States may not treat state-owned undertakings or undertakings in which state
authorities exercise decisive influence differently from private-owned undertakings by excluding them
from the licensing selection procedures for third generation mobile licences on the sole ground that they
are state-owned.

(1) Decision No 128/1999of the Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 1998 on the coordinated introduction
of a third-generation mobile and wireless communications system (UMTS) in the Community (OJ L 17, 22.1.1999).
(2) Commission Directive 96/2/EC of 16 January 1996, amending Directive 90/388/EEC with regard to mobile and

personal communications (OJ L 20, 26.1.1996).

(3) Parliament and Council Directive 97/13/EC of 10 April 1997, on a common framework for general authorisations

and individual licences in the field of telecommunication services (OJ L 117, 7.5.1997).

(2001/C 163 E/072)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3273/00

by Vittorio Sgarbi (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(20 October 2000)

Subject: Metropolitan city of Padua and Venice

Given that:

(cid:129) on 30 September 2000 the communes of Venice and Padua signed a memorandum of understanding,

the first stage in the process of creating the first metropolitan city;

(cid:129) this ambitious project aims to establish coordination and cooperation in all the main sectors, with

a view to achieving significant economies of scale and mutual economic growth.

Would the Commission state whether it foresees that this innovative system of collaboration might be of
interest in the wider European context, and how?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(15 December 2000)

The Commission has noted with interest the memorandum of understanding signed on 30 September
2000 by Venice and Padua concerning the creation of a first metropolitan area.

Local and regional authorities are of course free to organise themselves as they see fit within the
framework of their own legal and administrative systems. There are currently many ideas in the air about
citizenship and governance, and all innovative experiments are welcome as contributing towards these
discussions.

With regard to regional policy and economic and social cohesion more particularly, the Commission is
well aware of the key role of towns and cities in Europe(cid:146)s economy. They are centres of communications,
trade, creativity,
innovation and cultural heritage, but they are also disproportionate in their energy
consumption, waste production and sources of pollution. The Community Initiative URBAN is aimed
precisely at helping to fund schemes that promote an integrated approach to urban development.

However, the memorandum to which the Honourable Member refers is part of a more complex and
general process that does not fall within the competence of the Commission.