WRITTEN QUESTION E-3564/03 by Torben Lund (PSE) to the Commission. International telecommunication services and competition.
Date: 2003-12-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: consumer information, consumer price, consumer protection, frontier region, mobile phone, telecommunications industry

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/591

(2004/C 78 E/0624)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3562/03

by Giacomo Santini (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 December 2003)

Subject: Automatic renewal of concession for the Brenner motorway

The issue of the automatic renewal of the concession held by the Società Autostrade del Brennero is on the
agenda once again now that Commissioner Bolkestein has found against it. In view of the fact that the
long dispute over the matter, which has gone through a whole series of advances and setbacks, has yet to
be settled, can the Commission state:

whether it would agree that, in view of the A22 motorway’s strategic position, a derogation from the

1.
Community rules on invitations to tender should be granted?

2.
how it can justify the unfavourable opinion delivered in respect of the A22 when the automatic
renewal of similar concessions has in the past been authorised on more than one occasion in Italy on the
basis of Interministerial Directive No 283 of 20 October 1998?

whether it considers that it can place its trust in the current operating company, which has set aside
3.
a large amount of money to fund the building of the Brenner Base Tunnel and, on this basis, whether it
would agree to reconsider the Italian Government’s proposals that automatic renewal be authorised?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(16 January 2004)

As the honourable Member points out, the fact of the A22 motorway’s strategic position does not mean
that the award of the concession for the operation of the motorway should not be subject to the relevant
Community rules on awarding concessions. According to Community law, the renewal of a concession is
considered similar to the granting of a new concession. Consequently, since there was no prior invitation
to tender, the renewal of the concession awarded to the Autostrada del Brennero company gives rise to
serious misgivings with regard to its compatibility with the aforementioned Community rules.

Contrary to what the honourable Members seems to be stating, the Commission has never been asked to
give an opinion on renewals of concessions awarded in Italy on the basis of Interministerial Directive
the
No 283 of 20 October 1998.
Interministerial Directive,
forwarded full and precise information
concerning the procedures for its implementation, especially in connection with the concessions which
have in fact been renewed in accordance with the Directive, the duration of the renewals and, in each case,
the reasons justifying renewal. Therefore, where necessary, the Commission reserves the right to ask the
Italian authorities for information which will allow it to assess the implementation of the Directive.

Indeed, although the Commission is cognizant of

the Italian authorities have not

the text of

The Commission would point out that the problems it has indicated concerning the compatibility with
Community law of renewing the concession in question concern solely the lack of a prior invitation to
tender and certainly not the reliability of the current operator, judgement on whom in any case is not
among the responsibilities of the Commission.

Lastly, the Commission points out that, in its desire not to prejudice the completion of the objectives in
connection with which the problem exists, it is pursuing its contacts with the Italian authorities with a
view to arriving at a solution which complies with all the requirements involved.

(2004/C 78 E/0625)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3564/03

by Torben Lund (PSE) to the Commission

(2 December 2003)

Subject: International telecommunication services and competition

telecommunication services has increased at

The use of
the same rate as internationalisation and
technological advances mean that the telecommunications market is constantly changing. This creates
employment, new conditions for corporate growth and more choice for consumers.

C 78 E/592

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

the mobile telephone companies’ prices and range of
Unfortunately, many consumers
subscriptions are not transparent or flexible and that the prices for cross-border services are unreasonably
high. Competition does not take place under perfect conditions in this sector, which also means that
companies dependent on telecommunication services pay unreasonably high prices for a number of
essential services.

that

feel

In the light of this situation, will the Commission say to what extent it is aware of problems on the
European telecommunications market relating to the terms of competition,
including transparency,
comparability, cross-border services (e.g. roaming and the varying charges for these services) and the lack
of information to consumers at both Member State and EU level? Is the Commission aware of any studies
into the above problems? Does the Commission plan to ensure that subscribers using roaming are offered
the ‘shortest’ or ‘cheapest’ route instead of being diverted and paying more? What steps will
the
Commission take to improve the terms of competition (cid:1) with particular reference to transparency,
comparability, cross-border services and the lack of information to consumers (cid:1) for the benefit of
consumers and the European economy?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(28 January 2004)

The Commission monitors, on a regular basis, the conditions of competition prevailing in the European
telecommunications market, pursuant to its role in the enforcement of Union competition rules. The
Commission is indeed committed to applying such rules with determination in the telecommunications
sector, especially as regards cross-border services. In particular, the Commission wishes to recall several
issues of concern, notably, the level, transparency and comparability of tariffs on cross-border roaming
services were identified as a result of its sector inquiry into mobile roaming,
launched pursuant to
Article 12 of Council Regulation No 17 (1).

Following the ensuing talks with interested parties in 2001, the Commission notes that, in general, the
situation regarding consumer information across the Union has appreciably improved in several fields:
most mobile network operators now charge flat tariff rates to their subscribers for roamed voice calls made
in other Member States. Flat retail rates have replaced former non-transparent and unpredictable ad
valorem tariffs, which virtually all Union mobile operators used to apply, and which were based on mark-
ups placed on the wholesale tariff charged by the operator on whose network foreign subscribers were
roaming. Retail roaming rates are now customarily published by mobile network operators as part of their
tariffs and the Commission regularly publishes Union-wide surveys of such tariffs (2).

As to the choice of a specific mobile network to roam on in a different Member State, it is widespread
practice between mobile operators in the Union market to conclude preferential agreements, which may
include preferential discounts. Moreover, subscribers have the ability to override the automatic program-
ming of a foreign network proposed by their mobile operator.

As to the level of roaming tariffs charged between mobile operators at the wholesale level, the Commission
is actively investigating the issue with respect to Union competition rules and refers the Honourable
Member to its reply to the parliamentary question E-2689/03 by Mr Manders (3).

Over and above of the initiatives mentioned, in the absence of evidence or indications of infringements of
Union rules, the Commission believes that normal competition patterns between operators should bring
about benefits to consumers. This may take the form of better information and attractive specific offerings
for cross-border services, among the bundle of domestic and cross-border services that one or several of

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/593

the various mobile operators active in each Member State propose to their subscribers. Should specific
problems of consumer awareness arise in a particular Member State, the Commission believes that the
relevant National Regulatory Authority is in a position to take adequate steps.

(1) Working document on mobile roaming charges, DG Competition, December 2000, which can be found at the
following Web address: http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/antitrust/others/sector_inquiries/roaming, EEC Coun-
cil: Regulation No 17: First Regulation implementing Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty, OJ P 13, 21.2.1962.
(2) The last survey can be found at the following Web address: http://europa.eu.int/information_society/topics/telecoms/

regulatory/studies/documents/tariff_report_2002_12.pdf

(3) See page 416.

(2004/C 78 E/0626)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3566/03

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(2 December 2003)

Subject: Refund of budgetary resources

In a communication dated 29 October 2003, the Commission has proposed that unused budgetary
resources from the 2003 Community budget amounting to EUR 5 billion be refunded to the Member
States.

From which actions funded by the budget are these unused resources derived?

Answer given by Mrs Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(22 December 2003)

The Honourable Member is referring to the proposal made by the Commission in the Preliminary Draft
Amending Budget No7 to hand back to the Member States EUR 5 billion in surplus payment
appropriations in heading 2 of the Budget. The surplus appropriations were on the budget lines for the
completion of the pre-2000 Structural Funds programmes.

The Commission’s proposal has now been adopted, as an Amending Budget No 6, by the Budgetary
Authority.

(2004/C 78 E/0627)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3568/03

by Herman Schmid (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(25 November 2003)

Subject: Draft Constitution no solution to the EU’s lack of democratic legitimacy

According to one view, the democratic deficit in the EU consists in the fact that more and more decisions
are taken at EU level, while the people still identify with the national level of politics. Evidence of this is
provided by the very low turnout for elections to the European Parliament, a pattern which does not look
likely to be broken ahead of subsequent elections. According to this view, the core of the problem is that
there quite simply is no European identity or a single European people. On the basis of this view, several
countries (Ireland, Denmark, Sweden, the UK) have opposed the development of the EU towards a state
(they prefer the EU to remain an organisation which cooperates to resolve practical issues). If the draft
Constitution is adopted, a few more steps will have been taken towards a future state. However, according
to the above view, such a development is a denial of democracy in the EU. As long as the democratic
legitimacy of the European Parliament is low, any strengthening of its power entails a weakening of
democracy and a corresponding weakening of the influence of the national parliaments via the Council of
Ministers. This does not reduce but increases the distance between decision-makers at EU level and the
electorate. It is also defeats the object of establishing a constitution for the EU.