WRITTEN QUESTION P-0617/03 by W.G. van Velzen (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Article in the Financial Times of 20 February 2003 on differences of opinion within the Commission on competition in the wholesale broadband internet market in the EU.
Date: 2003-02-25
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, Internet access provider, competition policy, liberalisation of the market, regulation of telecommunications, telecommunications industry, transmission network

6.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 33 E/59

(2004/C 33 E/055)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0617/03

by W.G. van Velzen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(25 February 2003)

Subject: Article in the Financial Times of 20 February 2003 on differences of opinion within the

Commission on competition in the wholesale broadband internet market in the EU

With reference to an article appearing on the front page of the Financial Times of 20 February 2003,
’Brussels chiefs clash over internet’:

(cid:1) Could the Commission indicate what the situation has been since 1 January 2003 with regard to the
significant dominance by incumbents (former monopolists) on the EU wholesale broadband internet
market and with regard to local loop liberalisation?

(cid:1) Is it correct that, as of 1 January 2003, only 4 % of the 187 million telephone lines in the EU were
broadband and that most of this 4 % is in the hands of incumbents? Does the Commission have other
data?

(cid:1) When does the Commission expect to take decisions in connection with the probes it has launched

into the market conduct of, inter alia, France Telecom (Wanadoo) and Deutsche Telekom?

(cid:1) What differences exist within the Commission between the Competition DG and the Information
Society DG with regard to analysing the market as referred to in the article in question, and could the
Commission explain these differences?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(4 April 2003)

1.
The data provided in the Eighth report on the implementation of the telecommunications regulatory
package (1) reflect the situation as of September 2002. At that time, alternative suppliers accounted for
22 % of all DSL connections, but only 4 % of retail DSL connections were provided through local loop
unbundling (the difference between 22 % and 4 % corresponds to DSL resale services, whereby an
alternative provider simply re-packages a service determined by the incumbent, and DSL lines served
through wholesale bitstream access services). The most recent data made available to the Commission by
the regulatory authorities of the Member States, and referring to the market situation as of 1 January
2003, indicates that there are 12,67 million broadband access connections in the EU (principally using
telephone and T.V. cable modem connections). The market share of telecom incumbents for broadband
access is now 60 %. As regards local
loop unbundling, 1,27 million telephone lines have now been
unbundled, representing an increase of 189 000 lines since 1 October 2002.

2.
In the Commission’s Eighth Report it was indeed reported that 4 % of the 187 million telephone lines
in the EU were broadband lines. On the basis of the latest data available to the Commission, relating to
1 January 2003, this figure has now increased to 4,75 % (8,87 million lines).

In addition to the provision of broadband services over telephone lines, high speed Internet can also be
supplied over cable networks. Access to broadband services through cable networks account for around
2,6 million connections.

It should be emphasised that the percentage of actual take-up of broadband services does not reflect the
territorial coverage of broadband services. In fact, the large majority of EU households reside in areas
where broadband services are now technically available.

The Commission has the intention to take a definitive position on the two cases mentioned before

3.
the Summer break.

4.
The market analyses referred to (SMP Guidelines, Guidelines on Relevant Markets, Implementation
Reports) are adopted as a formal position of the Commission. Before the Commission takes a decision,
consultations between the services involved always take place. In relation to the situation in the markets in
question, the most recent assessment adopted by the Commission was the Eighth Report, referred to

C 33 E/60

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2004

above. The Commission has also adopted its position on the future analysis of these markets, under the
new regulatory framework, in the Commission Recommendation on relevant product and services markets
within the electronic communications sector (C (2003) 497, 11/02/2003). Regarding broadband services,
in this Recommendation the Commission has reached the conclusion that, while the development of
competing technological platforms was an objective of primary importance,
in compliance with the
principle of technological neutrality, under specific conditions ex-ante regulation of wholesale broadband
access may be necessary to foster competition.

(1) COM(2002) 695 final.

(2004/C 33 E/056)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0634/03

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(4 March 2003)

Subject: Protection of the Siberian tiger

Is the Commission aware of the threat to the Amurian or Siberian tiger, which, like the world’s four other
tiger species, is in danger of extinction?

What action is the Commission taking to contribute to the protection of the Amurian tiger, a species of
which, according to the WWF, only between 200 and 400 are now in existence, in Primorsky Kray and
the Khabarovsky Kray region in the far east of Russia near the border with China? Is this region covered by
any TACIS projects?

Could a project be launched under the EU/Russian Federation cooperation arrangements with the objective
of saving this endangered species?

What position and measures is the EU adopting in general to encourage the Russian Federation to protect
its national parks, which are now facing substantial problems thanks to the difficult economic situation in
the regions?

Is the Commission aware of the recent conflicts and tensions generated among the Udege, the main ethnic
group in the Amur regions, who have traditionally protected the tiger, which has a vital place in their
culture as a sacred animal? At present, following changes a few years ago in the local management of the
project, a crisis is affecting the partnership between the Udege and the WWF-backed managers of the
Changbai park in the Amur region. It appears that the WWF has been alerted at international level by the
Udege, but is not taking the necessary measures to bring its practices into line with its own policy
positions on strategy and principles regarding indigenous peoples.

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(28 March 2003)

The Commission is aware of the threat to the Amur tiger and has discussed this question with the Russian
authorities in the framework of the EU-Russia Partnership and Co-operation Agreement.

The Siberian tiger is listed on Annex A of Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 of 9 December 1996 on the
protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein (1) which implements the
provisions of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
(CITES) in the Union. This means that commercial trade in the species is prohibited and imports may only
take place under exceptional circumstances, e.g. for research aimed at the conservation of the species.

In the meeting of the Sub-Committee on Environment on 20 September 2001, the Russian authorities
explained that a National Strategy for the Protection of the Amur tiger exists and that Federal funding has
been allocated for a special programme. The Amur tiger population was reported to be about 450,
probably as high as it could be. An anti-poaching task force had been established, a Joint-Intervention