Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Bridging the Broadband Gap and i2010 eGovernment Action Plan
Date: 2007-02-13
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: Internet, communications policy, information technology, less-favoured region, means of communication, new technology, public administration, telecommunications, transmission network, waveband

30.6.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 146/63

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Bridging the Broadband Gap and i2010 eGovernment
Action Plan

(2007/C 146/09)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

— considers that the availability of broadband access at affordable rates across the EU is vital to ensuring
quality public services, regional competitiveness and productivity and a more even development of
the information and knowledge society, covering areas traditionally excluded. It considers that broad-
band connectivity should be supplied on the same basis as basic utilities such as drinking water and
electricity;

— considers very important the references made by the Commission to rural development, the use of
Structural Funds and its assessment of the compatibility with EU rules of publicly-funded broadband
access projects;

— hopes that the new regulatory framework on electronic communications will develop a policy of

radio-spectrum usage supporting the introduction of wireless broadband technology;

— echoes the Commission's call for Member States to strengthen their National Broadband Strategies by

increasing the involvement of local and regional authorities;

— takes the view that inclusive eGovernment involves countering potential digital exclusion when
services are provided online (the infrastructural and cultural digital divide), as well as developing social
inclusion policies by means of ICT;

— notes that the use of eGovernment should be aimed at both the restructuring and updating of public
services, and at achieving the goals of efficiency, effectiveness, cost efficiency, impartiality, transpar-
ency, simplification and participation. It believes that there is a clear need for public bodies to share
best practices;

— recommends facilitating cooperation, the exchange of know-how, the sharing of re-usable solutions
and initiatives towards greater transparency and public involvement in decision-making, particularly
in parliamentary decision-making processes.

C 146/64

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.6.2007

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Bridging the Broadband Gap (COM(2006)
129 final);

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on i2010 eGovernment Action Plan: Accelerating
eGovernment in Europe for the Benefit of All (COM(2006) 173 final);

Having regard to the decisions of the European Commission of 20 March 2006 and of 25 April 2006 to
request its opinion on both subjects, under Article 265(1) of the Treaty establishing the European Com-
munity;

Having regard to the decision of the Bureau of 25 April 2006 to instruct the Commission for Culture,
Education and Research to draw up an opinion on both subjects;

Having regard to its opinion on the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European
Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions i2010 —
A European Information Society for Growth and Employment (COM(2005) 229 final), (CdR 252/2005 fin) (1);

Having regard to its opinion on the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European
Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Connecting
Europe at High Speed: National Broadband Strategies (COM(2004) 369 final), (CdR 257/2004 fin) (2);

Having regard to its opinion on the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European
Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the eEurope
2005 Action Plan: An Update. (COM(2004) 380 final), (CdR 193/2004 fin) (3);

Having regard to the draft opinion adopted by the Commission for Culture, Education and Research on
30 November 2006 (CdR 272/2006 rev. 2), (Rapporteur: Mr Luciano Caveri, President of the Autonomous
Region of Valle d'Aosta (IT/ALDE));

adopted the following opinion at its 68th plenary session, held on 13-14 February 2007 (meeting of
13 February):

1. Broadband

The broadband gap

The Committee of the Regions

considers that the Internet is one of the most brilliant
1.1
innovations of our time.
Its potential to generate economic
growth can bring about substantial benefits such as the creation
of new services, the opening up of new investment and job
opportunities, productivity gains, reduced costs and increased
quality of life.

that

the diffusion of

1.2 welcomes the fact
information
technologies plays a crucial role in the achieving the Lisbon and
Gothenburg strategies, in terms of the improvement that they
bring to the operations of existing businesses, for the growth of
new and innovative businesses and the decisive contribution
they can make in educating workers and citizens in general.

1.3
points out the importance of increasing the availability
of information technologies at all levels of public administra-
tion, especially where public bodies are providing services
directly to citizens.

1.4
stresses, however, that on-line services such as such as
eGovernment, eHealth, eLearning and eProcurement can only
become inclusive and more interactive when they become

(1) OJ C 192, 16.8.2006, p. 15.
(2) OJ C 71, 22.3.2005, p. 55.
(3) OJ C 71, 22.3.2005, p. 59.

widely available to the EU's citizens and business community by
means of broadband connections.

1.5
considers, therefore, that the availability of broadband
access at affordable rates across the EU is vital to ensuring
quality public services, regional competitiveness and produc-
tivity and a more even development of the information and
knowledge society, covering areas traditionally excluded.

that
to rural development,

the Communication makes
1.6 welcomes the fact
several explicit
including
references
possible ad hoc funding lines, is a clear indication of the signifi-
cance attributed by the Commission to the potential benefits of
a more widespread availability of broadband services. These
benefits include increasing the competitiveness of rural areas
and the balanced development of the territory — and generally,
in areas with permanent geographical and natural handicaps —
as well as the high added value that it can bring to businesses
traditionally located in those areas.

1.7
considers very important, therefore, the references to
policies coming under the remit of the Directorate General for
Regional Policy — in particular, regarding the use of Structural
Funds — and of DG Competition — specifically, its assessment
of
the compatibility with EU rules of publicly-funded rural
broadband access projects.

30.6.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 146/65

1.8
fears that a common pitfall in broadband deployment is
the risk of market failure, where private operators perceive little
return on infrastructural investment in remote, rural, low-popu-
lation-density areas or where hilly terrain makes it a particularly
complex and onerous task. Such openness and flexibility is a
significant and positive sign, given that broadband is so crucial
to the socio-economic development of such areas.

1.15
calls on the Commission, therefore, to carry out forth-
with a study of the state of play with regard to infrastructure in
the regions of the new Member States and in the less urban
areas of the old Member States, with a view to identifying the
action needed to update existing infrastructure to the standard
required to meet the Lisbon objectives.

that

points out,

in support of

this argument,

1.9
the
Committee of the Regions has, on several occasions, analysed
and discussed the range of solutions being implemented by local
and regional authorities across Europe; what emerged clearly
was that there is no ‘one size fits all’ solution. In particular,
what may be suitable for a large urban centre may not be so for
other areas, such as a small mountainous region, with a
complex, rugged terrain, or sparse population in which extra
efforts are required for the provision of any kind of service.

1.10
recognises the significant progress made in recent
years in broadband deployment. However, in view of the EU's
target of reaching at least 90 % of its population by 2010, a
substantial disparity remains in terms of infrastructure, between
urban centres and remote areas, and between the old and new
Member States.

stresses, however, that this target of covering 90 % of
1.11
the population is not enough on its own,
if not viewed in
tandem with other factors (geographical spread, population
in small communities, such as upland
density, etc.).
areas, which often have difficulty accessing basic utilities (fixed
and mobile telephone services, terrestrial television, etc.) the
other 10 % could represent the exclusion of entire low-popula-
tion-density areas.

Indeed,

1.12
further points out, in relation to the broadband gap,
the need to also focus on the gap between broadband deploy-
ment and actual usage. To bridge this gap, non-technical
measures need to be taken at local level, aimed at promoting
the use of broadband among older people and disadvantaged or
traditionally less-receptive social groups, such as rural commu-
nities (e.g., Internet demonstration events, provision of public
access points, etc.).

finally,

stresses,

1.13
that while building the broadband
transport infrastructure and developing the services it carries, it
will be vital to ensure that all security requirements at every
level are met to ensure optimum levels of protection and user
privacy.

The situation of the new Member States

The Committee of the Regions

points out that data comparable to that which exists
1.14
regarding the EU-15 on broadband penetration, coverage and
actual usage of online services, is not yet available for the new
Member States on a regional level.

Technological solutions

The Committee of the Regions

1.16 warmly welcomes the Commission's proposal
to
review the legislative framework on electronic communications.

1.17
hopes that the new regulatory framework will, with
due regard for the subsidiarity principle, ensure non-discrimina-
tory competition between operators and existing and future
technologies, and will develop a policy of radio-spectrum usage
based on the principle of technological neutrality. This is particu-
larly important given that the recent introduction of wireless
technology, which is particularly suited to overcoming coverage
problems in rural areas or areas with difficult terrain, requires
that
spectrum be made available for broadband
deployment.

sufficient

1.18
entirely agrees the with the Commission's position
regarding radio spectrum as set out in its four previous commu-
nications presented in September and November 2005 and in
March and June 2006, when it advocated technological
neutrality,
transparency, efficient use of spectrum, and the
fostering of a competitive and innovative environment condu-
cive to the development of new technologies.

1.19
shares the Commission's vision that the use of frequen-
cies should no longer be based on the logic that each band is
allocated a specific technology, with services being carried on an
assigned frequency (e.g., 900 MHz used by the eTacs mobile
telephony service).

1.20
a strategy which allows flexibility in the use of
within a given spectrum frequency.

requests, therefore, that the Commission help to frame
technology

1.21
stresses the importance of ensuring that the applica-
tion of and compliance with the new regulatory framework
based on technological neutrality leads to the provision of
frequency for wireless communications, for broadband deploy-
ment, in order to alleviate the considerable disparity suffered by
areas with permanent geographical and natural handicaps.

1.22
notes that broadband deployment technologies such as
WiMAX could hold the key to overcoming the problems of
such geographically disadvantaged regions. In this regard, it is
interesting to note, by way of example, that this wireless tech-
nology is the subject of huge investment by operators on the
US market.

C 146/66

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.6.2007

Need for public intervention

The Committee of the Regions

considers

1.23
that broadband connectivity should be
supplied on the same basis as basic utilities such as drinking
water and electricity.

notes that closing the broadband gap in areas with a
1.24
complex terrain, such as areas with permanent geographical and
natural handicaps, requires greater investment than in lowland
areas, thus making profitable investment non-viable.

1.25
stresses, in light of this, that open public consultation
through the Digital Divide Forum HAS confirmed the need for
public intervention both on the part of national and local
authorities and on the part of industry and the voluntary sector.

The use of EU funds

The Committee of the Regions

1.26
shares the Commission's view on the importance of
encouraging local and regional authorities to make optimum
use of the possibilities offered by the Structural Funds and the
Rural Development Fund, in terms of both the supply and usage
of broadband. The Committee has on several occasions shown
the need for and the benefits of this approach.

1.27
hopes that the Commission will make its guidelines
more precise concerning situations where wireless broadband
services are deployed with the aid of Structural Fund resources
in regions where partial supply of such services already exists.
Geographically,
it is impossible in practice to limit access to
these services — especially where new wireless technologies are
used — to sparsely populated areas without them also being
accessible in built-up areas where these services are already
available.

1.28
points out, however, that not all rural areas and areas
with permanent geographical and natural handicaps — where
bridging the broadband gap is of particular urgency and is parti-
cularly problematic — are actually disadvantaged areas as
defined by the eligibility criteria for the Structural Funds.

1.29
considers it important, therefore, to find new and
flexible ways of intervening effectively in these areas, whether
through policies providing economic support to infrastructure
schemes set at local or regional level and coordinated at national
and EU levels, or through guidelines on dealing with market fail-
ures, common in the above-mentioned areas,
in accordance
with the EU principles of free competition.

1.30
notes, with regard to broadband deployment in areas
with permanent geographical and natural handicaps, in which,
as previously mentioned, operators are reluctant to invest given
that there is no prospect of a return on their investment, public-
private partnerships or modern forms of project financing are
not practicable, at least without the public sector providing the
bulk of the investment, and for which new types of incentives
must therefore be found.

considers, furthermore, that there is little use in intro-
1.31
ducing tax relief
the problem of
for subscribers given that
broadband deployment is principally one of supply rather than
demand. It would be more worthwhile to consider tax relief or
incentives
infrastructure
projects in areas with permanent geographical and commercial
handicaps, thus reducing the yield curve of the investment.

the operators

themselves

for

for

1.32 welcomes,
in view of the CoR's long-standing firm
commitment to furthering the exchange of best practices, the
Commission's proposal
to further promote best practice
exchange and to facilitate demand aggregation through a pan-
European website, which will act as a central information plat-
form for suppliers and local and regional governments.

considers

1.33
the
it very important,
Commission should actively seek to build substantial synergies
between its own sectoral programmes and the funding provided
through the Structural and Rural Development Funds.

therefore,

that

Regional and national broadband development strategies

The Committee of the Regions

echoes the Commission's call for Member States to
1.34
strengthen their National Broadband Strategies by increasing the
involvement of
local and regional authorities and setting
measurable targets for broadband rollout, particularly in terms
of public services.

2. i2010 — eGovernment Action Plan

The link between broadband and eGovernment

2.1
shares the Commission's view that broadband is one of
the key enabling factors in expanding the information society,
and in particular,
in ensuring equal access for all citizens,
increasing the competitiveness of business and improving the
efficiency of Public Administrations (PA).

30.6.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 146/67

2.2
considers that the ‘infrastructural digital divide’, whereby
the gap between those living in areas where advanced infrastruc-
ture and services are available and those living in areas with
permanent geographical and natural handicaps where such
infrastructure is lacking, is a substantial barrier to the participa-
tion of all
in the information society (eInclusion) and to the
ability — particularly in the case of the public sector — to
devise innovative ways of interacting with clients, citizens and
businesses. It thus constitutes a very real and substantial demo-
cratic deficit.

considers that

2.3
there is a continuing ‘cultural digital
divide’ — a gap in the knowledge needed to become a user of
ICT Services between new and old Member States, between one
Member State and another, between urban and rural areas and
between the different generations and social classes that make
up European society; it is crucial, therefore, to find means of
intervention with which to equip as many citizens as possible
with the basic knowledge needed to profit from innovation in
this field.

Making efficient and effective government a reality — metrics and
benchmarking

The Committee of the Regions

2.9
notes that the use of ICT should be aimed at both the
restructuring and updating of public services, and at achieving
the goals of efficiency, effectiveness, cost efficiency, impartiality,
transparency, simplification and participation.

notes that fewer visits to local government offices, less
2.10
time spent queuing to fulfil administrative procedures, easier
form-filling, single front office and reduced rates of error due to
direct control of data are all advantages that could help steer
service provision towards more modern methods than those
traditionally used.

No-one left behind — advancing inclusion through eGovernment

The Committee of the Regions

thinks it would be useful

2.11
measuring cost, benefit,
framework of indicators and methods.

to develop metrics for
impact, etc., using a common EU

takes the view that

inclusive eGovernment

2.4
involves
countering potential digital exclusion when services are provided
online (the infrastructural and cultural digital divide), as well as
developing social
inclusion policies by means of Information
and Communication Technology (ICT).

notes that,

2.5
in order to prevent marginalisation from
public services, administrations should take a multi-channel
approach, allowing users to interact by whichever means they
prefer (physical counter, website, digital TV, mobile telephony,
etc.).

socially disadvantaged groups,

considers that in order to increase eAccess to services
2.6
for
and support
measures must be provided so that equal opportunities are
ensured.

training

acknowledges

the need for public

2.7
administration
portals to comply with web usability standards as defined by the
W3C. Compliance should be assessed by suitable internation-
ally-recognised certification bodies.

important

considers it

that each inclusion project
2.8
should form part of an overall programme framework in order
to reduce the risk of introducing fragmented non-synergistic
measures.

2.12
is convinced that public sector investment, aimed at
system integration and cooperation, at sharing information and
at delivering online services, should for this reason be based on
the following financially quantifiable — and therefore compar-
able — key benefits: time saving for the public and businesses
(end users); increased PA efficiency and productivity. There are
also qualitative benefits such as: higher level of PA-service-user
satisfaction; greater PA transparency and accountability.

considers that,

2.13
to establish the common
assessment metrics system, it would be useful to compare the
various national or regional systems and then adopt the best
model.

in order

2.14
believes, therefore, that there is a clear need for public
bodies to share best practices, both in terms of administration
and in terms of technology,
in order to optimise the use of
available resources, but also to create added value by building
up professional eGovernment communities, using a root and
branch approach. Examination of worst practices — experience
which has failed to deliver the expected results — can also be
useful in assessing risk factors and critical issues.

2.15
suggests that publicly purchased applications used by
certain administrations could be made available in their original
format, with documentation attached, for the free use of other
PAs that request them,
in order to tailor them to their own
needs.

C 146/68

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.6.2007

High-impact key services for citizens and business

The Committee of the Regions

considers it crucial — if eGovernment is to take off
2.16
across Europe — to identify the services creating high added
value that can have a real impact on citizens, business and the
administrations themselves and that can drive the large-scale
deployment of the key enablers discussed below at point 2.20.

2.17 With regard to the recognised key service of eProcure-
ment, would like to see:

— all Member States bringing their procurement rules in line

with EU legislation;

— Member States establishing an administrative structure for

handling eProcurement;

— minimum standards being set regarding technology, intero-

perability and security across the various platforms.

Key enablers of eGovernment

The Committee of the Regions

considers that PA innovation and eGovernment devel-
2.18
opment depend on certain factors, including: the structuring of
public sector bodies, the convergence of EU legislation, the
fostering of an innovative culture among public authority offi-
cials and the administering of ICT-based applications.

2.19

advocates, with regard to these factors, the following:

— analysis and overhaul of PA back office procedures, aimed at
the provision of on-line services for citizens and businesses
that are deemed strategic within the action plan, and at
examining various means of cooperation making increased
use of electronic documents and email;

— regulatory intervention, aimed at defining ICT strategies,
rules, standards and common formats in order to increase
interoperability and practical cooperation;

technicians

(e.g. networks,

— ongoing extensive training for all staff, particularly aimed at
specialist
security,
privacy, etc.), staff working directly with procedures invol-
ving a heavy usage of ICT (e.g. Web technologies, security,
privacy), staff generally or indirectly involved in innovation
and modernisation drives
literacy,
(e.g.
privacy);

teaching digital

systems,

Brussels, 13 February 2007.

— promotion of open source platforms, involving a moderate
degree of investment, aimed at extending the drive towards
eGovernment and online services to small-scale administra-
tions;

— introduction of

federated authentication systems allowing

identification of users wishing to access network services;

— sharing of public information, in order to eliminate duplica-
tion and redundant information, aimed at ensuring greater
accuracy of data, including personal data;

— setting up of Local Services Centres aimed at kick-starting
and sustaining eGovernment, providing and administering
ICT services for participating administrations (particularly
small- and medium-sized), continually enhancing the oper-
ability and level of the services and providing professional
and technological resources.

Strengthening participation and democratic decision-making in Europe

The Committee of the Regions

considers that better public decision-making and more
2.20
extensive involvement of citizens are critical for the cohesion of
European society and that ICT can contribute at various levels,
even if many questions still need to be addressed, from the risk
of exclusion to the quality of decision-making.

recommends facilitating cooperation, the exchange of
2.21
know-how,
the sharing of re-usable solutions and initiatives
towards greater transparency and public involvement in deci-
sion-making, particularly in parliamentary decision-making
processes.

considers

it crucial

2.22
to rationalise and structure
communication between standards authorities to ensure a coor-
dinated pooling and use of all the resources, especially regarding
services that every public administration provides for the public
and businesses.

2.23
is aware of the benefits of involving the public in the
continuous improvement of administrative performance and
services provided by the public sector. One way of facilitating
this involvement could be by establishing a permanent online
facility to which users could send their comments and sugges-
tions.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Michel DELEBARRE