Opinion of the Commission pursuant to Article 251 (2), third subparagraph, point (c) of the EC Treaty, on the European Parliament's amendments to the Council's common position regarding the proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on universal service and users' rights relating to electronic communications networks and services amending the proposal of the Commission pursuant to Article 250 (2) of the EC Treaty
Date: 2002-02-07
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: consumer protection, new technology, telecommunications, telephone charges, transmission network

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 07.02.2002
COM(2002) 77 final

2000/0183 (COD)

OPINION OF THE COMMISSION

pursuant to Article 251 (2), third subparagraph, point (c) of the EC Treaty,
on the European Parliament's amendments
to the Council's common position regarding the
proposal for a

DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
AND OF THE COUNCIL

on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks
and services

AMENDING THE PROPOSAL OF THE COMMISSION
pursuant to Article 250 (2) of the EC Treaty

2000/0183 (COD)

OPINION OF THE COMMISSION

pursuant to Article 251 (2), third subparagraph, point (c) of the EC Treaty,
on the European Parliament's amendments
to the Council's common position regarding the
proposal for a

DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
AND OF THE COUNCIL

on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks
and services

1.

INTRODUCTION

Article 251(2), third subparagraph, point (c) of the EC Treaty provides that the Commission is
to deliver an opinion on the amendments proposed by the European Parliament at second
reading. The Commission sets out its opinion below on the 25 amendments proposed by
Parliament.

2.

BACKGROUND

In response to the conclusions of the special European Council of Lisbon of 23 – 24 March
2000, and building on the Communication on the results of the public consultation on the
1999 Review of the Electronic Communications Sector and the principles and orientations for
the new Regulatory Framework (COM(2000)239), the Commission proposed a package of
five directives that would make up the new regulatory framework. The new framework seeks
to take account of the convergence between telecommunications, broadcasting and IT sectors.
It seeks to reinforce competition in all market segments, while ensuring that the basic rights of
consumers continue to be protected. It is designed to cater for new, dynamic and largely
unpredictable markets with many more players than today.

The European Parliament adopted its first reading amendments on 1 March 2001. The
Council adopted its common position on 17 September 2001. The amendments voted by the
European Parliament in second reading are part of a compromise package of amendments on
four directives, including the present directive, and one decision on spectrum that was put as
an ensemble to the EP by the Council Presidency. The package was accepted in its totality in
the plenary vote by the EP on 12 December. Since the amendments are acceptable to the
Council, the conciliation procedure will not be invoked. Final adoption by the Council is
foreseen in the beginning of 2002 following verification of the texts by jurist-linguists.

3.

PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSAL

This directive aims to ensure provision of universal service for public telephony services in an
environment of greater overall competitivity with provisions for financing the cost of
providing universal service in the most competitively neutral manner and for ensuring a

2

maximum of information transparency. It also establishes rights of users and consumers of
electronic communications services, with corresponding obligations on undertakings. It aims
to ensure interoperability of digital consumer television equipment and to ensure the provision
of certain mandatory services, such as the provision of leased lines. Finally, it lays down
harmonised rules for the imposition of ‘must carry’ obligations by Member States on network
operators.

4.

OPINION OF THE COMMISSION ON THE AMENDMENTS BY THE EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT

The Parliament adopted 25 amendments to the Universal Service directive on 12 December
2001. The Commission can accept all of them in full.

4.1.

“Must carry” (amendment 4)

Amendment 4, relating to Recital 43, recognises that MS have the possibility to include
specific measures for appropriate access by disabled users within “must carry” obligations
imposed under the directive. This amendment makes clear that MS may impose, in the
context of ‘must carry’ obligations, requirements for network operators to transmit certain
services to ensure access by disabled, which the Commission fully supports.

4.2.

Standard for digital TV (amendment 2)

The Parliament came back in its second reading to provisions on interoperability, in particular
implementation of the so-called Multimedia Home Platform (MHP) standard for interactive
services on digital TV. The EP amendment avoids mandating the MHP standard and endorsed
the approach whereby standardisation should be industry-led and voluntary. This
compromise, in amendment 2 to recital 33, strikes a good balance between the two positions.
It leaves to the industry the task to agree on a common standard for display and presentation
of digital interactive television services by means of a market-driven mechanism, which the
Commission fully supports.

4.3.

Rights of disabled users and quality of service standards (amendments 1, 8, 10,
19 and 20)

Several amendments adopted by the European Parliament in second reading extend specific
provisions, in Recital 13, and in Articles 6, 11 and 33, on quality of service standards,
performance standards and relevant parameters to cover the quality of service for disabled
users. These are important additions to the directive. Amendments 1 and 10 foresee the
development of new parameters, to assess the quality of services for disabled users, while
Amendment 8 ensures that disabled users’ needs are considered when providing public pay
telephones. Amendment 19 ensures that disabled users’ views must be considered during the
public consultations that Member States conduct under the directive while Amendment 20
encourages interested parties to develop codes of conduct and operating standards in order to
improve the general quality of service provision. The Commission can accept all of the
amendments in full.

3

4.4.

Consumer protection, retail price regulation and price and information
transparency (amendments 9, 11, 12, 14, 18, 22, 23, 24 and 25)

Several amendments relating to consumer protection,
information transparency were adopted by the European Parliament
concerning Articles 17, 20, 21 and 34, Annex I and Annex II.

retail regulation and price and
in second reading,

In the sensitive area of retail tariff regulation, EP Amendment 11 strikes a good balance
between Parliamentary and Council positions. The EP amendment no longer requires that
NRAs adopt a reasoned opinion before concluding that wholesale regulation would not
correct the competition problem in the relevant market. The EP amendment has nonetheless
strengthened the Common Position text in that NRAs were only required to “consider” that
tariff regulation. The
wholesale regulation would be insufficient before imposing retail
amendment adopted by the Parliament in second reading introduces greater rigour into the
regulatory assessment by NRAs, which is acceptable both to the Council and the
Commission. Amendment 12 improves the drafting and clarifies the scope of obligations
relating to the implementation of appropriate cost accounting systems. EP Amendment 14
specifies that the ‘particulars of prices and tariffs’ must be included in subscriber contracts.
Further modification of contract terms is covered by another provision of the directive
whereby subscribers may withdraw without penalty if the terms are proposed to be modified.

Amendment 18 encourages NRAs to facilitate the provision of information on prices and the
development of interactive guides. The original wording of the amendment at first reading
prescribed the obligation as falling on NRAs to ensure the development of interactive on-line
guides. The text of this amendment was re-formulated in second reading to improve its
drafting. Amendment 25 mandates more information to be published on certain facilities and
services available under universal service, such as measures designed to control expenditure.

The Commission supports all these amendments in full.

4.5.

Use of co-regulation (amendment 6)

Amendment 6 endorses the principle of co-regulation in Recital 48 for achieving quality of
standards and improved performance, but stipulates that co-regulatory measures should be
guided by the same principles as formal regulation. The original formulation of Amendment 6
was more prescriptive. In this softer version, the Commission can accept the amendment in
full.

4.6.

Extending regulation to SMEs (amendments 5, 7, 13, 15, 16, 17 and 21)

Amendments 5, 7, 13, 15, 16, 17 and 21 allow Member States to go beyond the minimum
harmonisation prescribed so as to allow extension of certain obligation of the Directive, that
must cover all consumers, to cover also small and medium-sized enterprises. These are
amendments that the Commission fully supports.

4.7.

112 emergency number (amendment 3)

Amendment 3 recognises that the obligation for network operators to provide caller location
information to national emergency authorities is limited to the technical feasibility of the
equipment. Amendment 3 notes additionally that any such information must be received and
used in accordance of the Data Protection Directive. The Commission fully supports these
provisions.

4

5.

CONCLUSION

Pursuant to Article 250(2) of the EC Treaty, the Commission amends its proposal as set out
above.

5