WRITTEN QUESTION P-0360/04 by Benedetto Della Vedova (NI) to the Commission. Failure to include directory services among universal service obligations.
Date: 2004-02-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, consumer protection, regulation of telecommunications, universal service

C 84 E/374

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

(2004/C 84 E/0434)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0360/04

by Benedetto Della Vedova (NI) to the Commission

(6 February 2004)

Subject: Failure to include directory services among universal service obligations

In September 2003 the Italian Government
issued a legislative decree approving the ‘Electronic
Communications Code’, which transposes into national law Directives 2002/19/EC (1) (Access Directive),
2002/20/EC (2)
(Framework Directive) and 2002/22/EC (4)
(Universal Service Directive).

(Authorisation Directive), 2002/21/EC (3)

However, under the terms of the ‘Code’:

(a)

(b)

the directory service (known in Italy as ‘Service 12’, provided by Telecom Italia) is not included among
the services supplied as part of the universal service (Article 55 of the Code);

the periodic review of the services to be included in the universal service is carried out by the
Government, following consultation of the Telecommunications Authority (Article 65 of the Code).

Considering that:

(cid:1) Articles 5 and 25 of the Universal Service Directive (2002/22/EC) provide for the inclusion of
directory inquiry services among universal service obligations (this was reiterated, with reference to
the ‘12’ service, by the Italian Communications Authority in its decision 103/03/CONS of April 2003);
and Article 3 therefore stipulates that Member States will ensure that such services are made available
‘at the quality specified to all end-users in their territory, independently of geographical location, and,
in the light of specific national conditions, at an affordable price’.

(cid:1) Article 15 of Directive 2002/22/EC stipulates that the Commission (and not the national governments)
will be responsible for carrying out a periodic review of the scope of universal service, in the light of
social, economic and technological developments.

(cid:1) The seriousness of the problem referred to in point (a) above is highlighted by the fact that it has
caused a steady increase in the cost of the ‘12’ service between November and January, and almost a
doubling of costs for residential users.

Does the Commission not consider, in view of the information given in points (a) and (b) above, that the
‘Electronic Communications Code’ contravenes the Universal Service Directive (2002/22/EC)?

(1) OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 7.
(2) OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 21.
(3) OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 33.
(4) OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 51.

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 2004)

Article 6(1)(b) of Directive 2002/22/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002, on universal
service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services, hereafter the
Universal Service Directive, provides that Member States shall ensure that at least one comprehensive
telephone directory enquiry service is available to all end-users, including users of public pay phones. Since
this service falls within the scope of universal service, it must be made available at a specified quality and
at an affordable price.
(Codice)
(in Article 55) states that there are several different offers of directory enquiry services that met the above-
mentioned criteria. Furthermore, the Codice provides for a six monthly review of the market conditions
and empowers the Ministry of Communications to impose, where needed, the relevant obligation on
designated undertaking(s).

In the case of Italy, the ‘Codice delle Communicazione Elettroniche’

At present, in Italy, end-users may choose between two or three different operators that provide directory
enquiry services. They may use the service provided by Telecom Italia (number 12), the service provided

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/375

by Seat Pagine Gialle (89.24.24) and that provided by their own telephone provider (412) (in these two
last cases they are ‘enhanced’ directory enquiry services with the possibility to access information in
addition to the simple telephone number).

Before the entry into force of the Codice, the directory enquiry service was provided by Telecom Italia
(number 12) as the universal service provider. Under the current service conditions the price for the
interactive voice recorded service remains more or less the same as before (that
is EUR 0,50 for
information) and is doubled if operator assistance is required.

As regards the second part of the Honourable Member’s question, Article 65 of the Codice provides that
the Ministry reviews every year the application of the universal service obligations in order to determine to
which services they should be applied. Article 3(2) of the Universal Service Directive requires Member
States to determine the most efficient and appropriate approach for ensuring the implementation of
universal service, whilst respecting the principles of objectivity, transparency, non-discrimination and
proportionality. It, therefore, appears fully appropriate and even desirable that national authorities should
periodically review the conditions that have underpinned their earlier decisions. Also, the Codice explicitly
states that the review will be based, among other things, on the position taken by the Commission as part
of its periodic review under Article 15 of the Universal Service Directive.

The Commission will continue to monitor the compliance by the Member States, including Italy, with the
in the event of non-compliance, may propose the opening of an
Universal Service Directive and,
infringement proceeding with a view to having the Court of
Justice rule on the existence of this
infringement. As the Honourable Member will recall, the Court has sole competence to rule on the legality
or otherwise of a transposition measure. The Commission will,
in particular, monitor the situation
regarding the periodical review by the Italian authorities of the conditions under which these services are
provided, so as to ensure that
transparency, non-discrimination and
proportionality are met.

the principles of objectivity,

(2004/C 84 E/0435)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0361/04

by Dana Scallon (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 February 2004)

Subject: Fluoridation of Irish drinking water

1. Will the Commission confirm that its Environment DG has received representations from the EP’s
Committee on Petitions on the ‘very serious and persistent problems with Irish public water schemes’ (1) in
particular the excess amounts of aluminium in fluoridated supplies?

2. Will the Commission reveal what, if any, investigations the Commission has made into this serious
situation, not only in the Galway area but into the other 42 Sanitary Authorities in Ireland that also add
fluoride, three quarters of whom regularly exceed the legal limit for aluminium, according to the EPA’s
‘Quality of Drinking Water, 2001’

3. Why were these criticisms about Irish drinking water not scrutinised as part of the review and
possible revision of the Drinking Water Directive during 2003 before its implementation?

(1) See PE 329 242.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(22 March 2004)

1. and 2.
The Honourable Member appears to be referring to a number of distinct drinking water issues
in Ireland. Petitions 333/98, 661/2000, 1497/2002 before the Petitions Committee of the Parliament
concern, respectively, microbiological contamination of a public drinking water supply at Carraroe, County