WRITTEN QUESTION E-3398/00 by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Overcharging by mobile oeprators.
Date: 2000-11-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: common price policy, competence of the Member States, mobile phone, telephone charges

C 174 E/48

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

19.6.2001

The Commission has announced in its Social Policy Agenda (5) that it will consult the social partners on
possible future Community action in relation to data protection in the employment context.

(1) COM(2000) 495 final.
(2) See the Communication(cid:146)s sub-chapters 9.1. on (cid:145)Custodial Penalties(cid:146) and 9.4. on (cid:145)Alternative Sanctions(cid:146).
(3) OJ L 281, 23.11.1995.
(4) Code of practice on the protection of worker(cid:146)s personal data, Doc MEWP/1996/5.
(5) Communication from the Commission to the Council, the Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the

Committee of Regions, COM(2000) 379 final.

(2001/C 174 E/048)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3398/00

by Marjo Matikainen-Kallstr(cid:246)m (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 November 2000)

Subject: Overcharging by mobile oeprators

In the light of recent studies showing European mobile operators overcharging for call termination by at
least 40-70 %, which resulted in fixed operators subsidising mobile operators by at least € 4,5 billion in
1999, what immediate initiatives and actions is the European Commission considering to:

(cid:129) assist national regulatory authorities in setting cost-oriented mobile interconnection charges where

European law requires this; and

(cid:129) promote best practice in ceiling rates for termination of calls from fixed to mobile networks (cid:129) based

on existing LRIC models, or on the cost of mobile-to-mobile termination?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(7 December 2000)

Community law requires that the charges for terminating calls on a mobile network should be cost-
oriented if the mobile operator has significant market power on the national market for interconnection
(Directive 97/33/EC on interconnection in telecommunications with regard to ensuring universal service
and interoperability through application of the principles of open network provision (ONP) (1), Article
7(2)).

It is for the national regulatory authority (NRA) in each Member State to decide which mobile operators
fall into this category. To date, NRAs have notified the following mobile network operators as having
significant market power in the national market for interconnection:

Spain

France

Ireland

Italy

Austria

Finland

Sweden

Telef(cid:243)nica M(cid:243)viles, Airtel

FT Mobiles, SFR

Eircell

TIM, Omnitel

Mobilkom

Sonera, Radiolinja

Telia

19.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 174 E/49

The Commission has issued a recommendation on interconnection in a liberalised telecommunications
market (cid:129) Part 1: Interconnection pricing (2) which recommends that, where cost orientation is imposed,
interconnection charges should be calculated on the basis of long run average incremental costs (LRIC).

The recommendation also indicates (cid:145)best current practice(cid:146) interconnection charges for call termination on
fixed networks. However the cost structure of mobile networks is different to that of fixed networks, and
the (cid:145)best current practice(cid:146) interconnection charges in the recommendation do not apply to call termination
on mobile networks.

The Commission has issued a call for tenders for a study on cost structures in mobile networks, and the
results of this study will be published and made available to national regulatory authorities during 2001.
On the basis of the study results, the Commission will consider whether it needs to take further action.

The Commission is in parallel assessing a complaint of a fixed operator against a number of mobile
operators for alleged charging of excessive prices. Since the opening of the proceeding most of the
operators concerned have decreased their fixed to mobile termination rates.

(1) OJ L 199, 26.7.1997.
(2) OJ L 73, 12.3.1998.

(2001/C 174 E/049)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3402/00

by Nicole Thomas-Mauro (UEN) to the Commission

(7 November 2000)

Subject: Intercultural management in the Commission

With the development of international competition and the European market,
intercultural aspects of
management are increasingly an area for study. The structure of the European Union means that it relies
heavily, like the business world, on confidence between partners. Areas of potential misunderstanding thus
needs careful management.

Bearing in mind the world of business and its experiences, as well as research into international and
1.
in managing fifteen nationalities which
intercultural management, can the Commission say whether,
engage daily in negotiating specialised or sensitive subjects, it takes account of the problems arising from
the intercultural aspect, a source of both enrichment and tensions?

Does the Commission, which for decades has been a veritable test bed for this phenomenon, a

2.
melting pot of multicultural encounters, have studies available on the subject?

3.
At the level of the Commission, as in economic life, an error of analysis or assessment, or quite
simply a misunderstanding, can have serious consequences (failure of projects, financial costs, cost in
manpower, etc.).

Has the Commission ever tried to calculate the cost of intercultural misunderstandings?

4.
Has the Commission made a study of the causes and consequences of problems experienced by its
staff (in order to isolate the intercultural factor) with a view to making its administration more efficient?
Has the Commission, in the light of its experience, thought about methods of intercultural management
and ways of managing difference?

5.
Since the aim is to achieve clear, unhampered communication within the group, does the Commis-
sion organise training programmes like those offered in the business world to expatriates, managers and
workers in multinational teams with the aim of making them aware that cultural points of reference are
not absolutes, so that they will acknowledge difference more readily and collaborate more effectively?