Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee – Universal Service rights in the electronic communications in the European Union (exploratory opinion requested by the European Commission)
Date: 2024-09-18
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: Internet, digital literacy, electronic government, information technology, mobile communication, postal and telecommunications services, protection of communications, provision of services, regulation of telecommunications, universal service








C_202406864EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/6864


28.11.2024







Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee


Universal Service rights in the electronic communications in the European Union


(exploratory opinion requested by the European Commission)

(C/2024/6864)


Rapporteur: 
Mateusz SZYMAŃSKI






Referral


European Commission, 11.12.2023




Legal basis


Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union




Section responsible


Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society




Adopted in section


18.7.2024




Adopted at plenary


18.9.2024




Plenary session No


590




Outcome of vote
(for/against/abstentions)


174/0/1




1.   Conclusions and recommendations









1.1.


The objectives and targets of a European policy on accessibility of high-quality internet connectivity are not being fully achieved. There are regions where the speed and stability of the internet connection are inadequate. Lack of digital skills and price are also a barrier to internet access. It can therefore be concluded that in Europe there is a problem of exclusion when it comes to internet access. This drives social and economic inequalities.












1.2.


The EESC is therefore in favour of strengthening the EU’s commitment to ensuring and making it a binding goal to provide universal access to an internet connection of at least 100 Mb/s which enables effective use of rapidly developing basic digital services, which should be revised along with technical developments. To make this possible, it is recommended that the EU Member States designate universal service operators in each country and support universal connectivity when market forces are not sufficient.












1.3.


At the same time, the Committee believes that, in the current socio-economic circumstances, it is justifiable to recognise internet access as a fundamental right. This would put the principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights into practice and adequately reflect the scope and significance of electronically delivered public services, including essential services such as health, public administration or education.












1.4.


Infrastructure is an important challenge when it comes to meeting the EU’s ambitious goals on internet access. Investment needs are considerable. It is therefore necessary to seek new sources of funding and make efficient use of existing funds. The EESC calls for consideration to be given to regulations that require platforms generating large amounts of data, especially large tech companies, to contribute to the cost of maintenance and development of the network and making sure it is secure. This will provide incentives and funds to limit the environmental costs of using digital services.












1.5.


Public engagement in creating space for developing content, digital tools and a culture of internet use should be an important aspect of the realisation of universal service. These include policy for developing apps for communication with public administration, public open source development, holding debates on ethical use of the internet, use of public infrastructure to ensure internet access or verifying and labelling unreliable content or content that threatens the safety of individuals, especially young people, including in terms of internet dependency. This would make an important contribution to the decentralisation of technology, the democratisation of its development, security and transparency, especially in relation to the use of data. In this regard, the EESC calls for the recognition of the right to not use internet services and to protect privacy.












1.6.


Digital skills, lifelong learning and ability to verify information and knowledge of the different risks involved in making personal data available online should be important components of the EU’s connectivity policy. The EESC calls for active steps to be taken in this regard, as the dynamic development of e-services may lead to segments of the population with low digital skills being excluded. These tasks can be carried out by public bodies, civic organisations and in workplaces by employers. This is all the more important as the internet has become a space where disinformation and manipulation are increasingly present.












1.7.


Further possibilities should be sought for regulatory bodies to respond to existing challenges. Other areas of action include price regulation, disinformation risks and telecom market design. Therefore the Committee also calls for the capacity of these bodies to be strengthened to ensure that they can analyse the impact of their decisions in a broader way and take into account such dimensions as industrial policy, investments, employment, working conditions and wages, social implications, etc. Monitoring of the implementation of the universal service is needed and the EESC requests cooperation with civil society and other stakeholders in this regard.




2.   Background and context









2.1.


The COVID-19 pandemic showed how important basic services delivered through electronic communication are. Many of the digital solutions tested and deployed during the pandemic were adopted, and are still being developed, and are considered an important element of the EU’s resilience to future crises.












2.2.


The European Electronic Communications Code (‘the Code’) was established in 2018 and subsequently implemented in the EU Member States. It replaced the 2002 Universal Service Directive, which focused on ensuring that users can connect to the public communications network in a given location, with particular consideration for the situation of poor people, people living in areas far from major urban centres and persons with disabilities. The directive also provided for a comprehensive telephone directory, access to the emergency number ‘112’, the promotion of service numbers, and consumer protection mechanisms.












2.3.


The Code strengthens these regulations and introduces new objectives and targets. It refers, among other things, to affordable and adequate broadband internet access, which must be made available to all consumers, regardless of location or income. It uses an internet connection speed of 100 Mb/s as a reference point. It also introduces a requirement to establish a public alert system and sets regulatory predictability and the development of 5G networks as goals. Unfortunately, despite the December 2020 deadline for implementing these provisions having passed, it has still not been fully implemented in all countries (1). It is therefore difficult to assess how effective it is.












2.4.


The European Pillar of Social Rights (EPSR) is the basis for a fair and sustainable EU policy. Its 20 principles include access to essential services, including digital communication. Furthermore, the EPSR defines such access as a right, which underlines the specific commitment of the EU and its Member States.












2.5.


The 2030 targets set at EU level under the Digital Decade Programme (2) should also not be overlooked. Selected objectives of this strategy include: 75 % of EU companies using cloud computing, AI or big data, reaching the 90 % threshold for SMEs using at least basic digital technologies, Gigabit connectivity and 5G for everyone, universal access to key public services on the internet and increased digital skills.




3.   General comments









3.1.


The minimum connection speed to use email comfortably is roughly 5 Mb/s, for social media and streaming services at least 10 Mb/s is needed. Therefore, the target set of 100 Mb/s is appropriate, even ambitious. However, it is worth noting that 5G internet technology enables data to be transmitted much faster, so it is worth considering adapting the target to real network performance and needs in the future.












3.2.


In the context of the above, Annex V to the Code sets out the minimum set of services that sufficient broadband internet access service must be able to support and this must be taken into account in the process of setting the minimum broadband speed. Additionally, the list does not seem sufficient now, as it does not include, for example, e-learning, online streaming or medical services. It is recommended that such lists be updated in line with technological developments.












3.3.


Data show that average differences in download speeds between Member States are significant and often diverge from EU policies. Regional data paint an even more varied picture (3). There are also differences in the quality of the available network (4). Additionally, according to the Commission’s report on access to essential public services in the EU (5), around 2,4 % of people in the EU could not afford an internet connection. However, for people at risk of poverty or social exclusion, the EU average was 7,6 %, with Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary recording values of 25 %, 20,5 % and 16,5 % respectively. This shows that, despite significant progress in economic development, there are still areas of digital exclusion in the EU.












3.4.


This means that the objectives set have not been universally achieved. The EESC therefore believes that all EU citizens should be guaranteed the right to electronic communications, which would be the full realisation of this universal service. A key element of this right would be the provision of universal, stable internet access of at least 100 Mb/s.












3.5.


The recognition of internet access as a fundamental right stems from the significant role that internet access plays in the realisation of a wide range of fundamental individual rights. Here an approach is needed in which internet access is treated as a meta-right – a human right that enables and creates the conditions for the realisation of other fundamental rights, from material rights, such as privacy, freedom of expression, expressing views, to procedural rights such as information and participation in public life, politics or the environmental field. According to regulations in force, it is therefore logical to include this right in a new (normative) concept while excluding the possibility of solely categorising it as an idea that by its nature may not be realised. This understanding of the right to internet connectivity is also shared by the European Court of Human Rights, which interprets Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (6) as guaranteeing access to parts of online content as a human right.












3.6.


Taking this perspective and considering internet access as a human right in new legislative initiatives will increase roll-out of internet access and will expand the range of legal instruments through which an individual can realise this right. This is particularly the case given that, in many Member States, e-services are starting to become the primary means to achieve fundamental individual rights. The ‘e-state’ is no longer complementary to how states traditionally function but is becoming a fully-fledged form of communication and pursuing individual interests. This will also increase the focus on the implementation of the provisions of the Code.












3.7.


In the EESC’s view, the EU acquis in its current form is capable of meeting the challenges of universal internet accessibility on the basis of equality. The European legal sphere will be able to serve as a reference for other human rights protection systems (universal or regional) which are just starting to build normative standards in this human rights field. The solutions adopted in Estonia in this regard are particularly worth noting.












3.8.


It is also worth noting the UN’s work on recognising internet access as a human right. There is a gradual shift away from categorising internet access as a service towards categorisation in terms of the realisation of human rights, particularly Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In July 2021, the UN Human Rights Council issued a resolution entitled The promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights on the Internet (7). This is already the fifth resolution this council has made in this area, with the first of its initiatives to recognise internet access as a human right (meta-right) appearing as early as 2012. The Council of Europe is heading in a similar direction. In 2014, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe stated in its resolution 1987 (2014) The right to Internet access that everyone should have the right of access to the internet as a basis for the realisation of the human rights enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights, laying down 12 principles for such access (8).












3.9.


One of the arguments against including broadband internet access as a universal service was that the scale of the use of this type of connection would not justify the costs incurred. However, current uses and needs render this assumption obsolete. The socio-economic impact of decisions on both individual and collective action is to be assessed, including, in particular, tackling digital exclusion and growing social inequalities.












3.10.


In this regard, the EESC would like to point out that adequate internet infrastructure is also an important stimulus for the economic development of individual regions, which goes hand in hand with the objectives of EU cohesion policy. Access to appropriate communication infrastructure can be an important factor in making investment decisions in business. Investments in fibre, satellite communications and 5G are important parts of this strategy. More decentralised solutions, such as urban mesh networks, may also be important in the future.












3.11.


Designated universal service providers have an important role to play. As the BEREC report states (9), only nine Member States decided to designate service providers. This suggests that it is mostly the market that is expected to ensure universal access to the basic services. In the EESC’s opinion, as the Member States are responsible for the minimum level of connectivity and in light of the fact that they have not fully implemented the Code yet, this is not sufficient. It is preferable to designate the universal service provider in each Member State which is remunerated for this minimum service at a level sufficient to be profitable. Alternatively, to directly indicate other public policy measures which will enable connectivity to the end users in an affordable way.












3.12.


Assuming that regulatory policy in this field would move away from simple calculation of costs, it is worth considering an additional role for regulators, which should have the right to review tariffs with the possibility of adjustment if these prices limit access to essential electronic services, in particular high-speed internet access. At the same time, telecommunication service rates should balance the need for investment, industrial policy, the working conditions and wages in the sector.












3.13.


In principle, the EESC believes that the burden of responsibility for providing telecommunications services should not only lie with the state, consumers and infrastructure providers. The benefits of digitalisation for market players that generate significant data flows must also be taken into account. An appropriate framework should therefore be developed so that those data generators also contribute proportionally to the maintenance and development of infrastructure. This could be inspired by the ‘polluter pays’ policy, which is already being implemented in investments that have an impact on the environment. In this regard, market players whose business relies on the transfer of large amounts of data generate the need to develop the infrastructure, increase the maintenance cost and generate environmental impact. It is also worth promoting existing sources of EU and EIB funding. On the other hand, in order to strike the right balance, it would be expected that internet infrastructure will be open to other service providers and limitations in this regard will be prevented.












3.14.


It is worth noting that digital services are not environmentally neutral. Every process in the virtual world requires significant energy and water resources. Thus, extending the catalogue of entities contributing to the cost of maintaining and developing the network could provide the resources needed to protect the environment while encouraging the creation of technologies that limit the negative environmental impact.












3.15.


In this regard, the EESC points out that monitoring of the universal service implementation is not common in all Member States. In the Committee’s opinion it is crucial to monitor how the universal service is delivered in practice and improve the system when necessary. Regulators play the main role, however, the EESC recommends supplementing their work with the expertise and observations from civil society, therefore close cooperation with stakeholders is required.












3.16.


It is the right of users of electronic communications services not just to use them, but also to not use them. Consumers should have the right to determine their digital legacy and decide what will happen to their personal information. It is also very important to provide full information about what the information that a specific digital platform collects when using its services is being used for and to indicate the possibility to refuse to provide this information. The EESC is considering the introduction of mechanisms that would allow data to be made available, e.g. in return for a lower price for a given service.




4.   Specific comments









4.1.


The EESC believes that ensuring connectivity is only part of the desired policy. Awareness of the tools available and the ability to use them are key. Widespread use of apps for contact with public administration is limited by factors such as lack of knowledge in this area. This is particularly important in the context of the development of the EU Digital Identity Wallet (10). Therefore, the continuous improvement of knowledge and skills related to digital communication services is an important task that civil society organisations, social partners and public employment services can perform. It is therefore encouraged to strengthen cooperation to ensure that such activities are carried out at national and local level and in workplaces.












4.2.


In addition, public administrations, civic organisations and businesses are encouraged to develop digital strategies that take into account elements that include the following: security, appropriate communication, efficient use of funds, skills of the workforce and a culture of adapting to new technologies (11).












4.3.


In this context, it is worth noting that a number of services already provided in the real world, such as postal services, are becoming less important. Engaging the resources of these services (e.g. post offices) to support people with limited opportunities to use the internet could alleviate the pressure of the ongoing digitalisation of traditional services. Such initiatives, as well as the widespread use of secure hot spots, would be an important complement to the range of individual connectivity. Nevertheless, it is important to ensure that public services continue to be accessible in their traditional forms to those who, for various reasons, are unable or unwilling to use the digital option.












4.4.


One type of universal service could also be to make public open source basic applications and code publicly available. This would foster the decentralisation of technology development, democratisation of use and resilience and security of user-tested software.












4.5.


Particular attention should be paid to the situation of persons with disabilities. Tackling exclusion in this group is a challenge, as communication may be difficult for them and may require advanced solutions. This opens up opportunities for integration, but it is important that solutions make it possible to communicate with public bodies, for example, for administrative or health-related matters. Screen readers, subtitles and voice control, for example, will be useful.












4.6.


The EESC is considering introducing mechanisms to classify and flag information platforms in terms of possible risks for users, e.g. risks to young people’s mental health, risks relating to private data or indication of the origin of the information. This would increase awareness of these types of risks and help users select information independently. We would again like to highlight the role of civic organisations in promoting awareness of protecting personal data and the risks associated with it.












4.7.


The Committee believes that part of the strategy for delivering universal services could be to develop codes of ethics for internet use, either at EU or Member State level. The risks that have already been mentioned, but also new technologies, particularly those that use AI, raise ethical questions. Such activities would be of educational value and raise awareness of the non-technological effects of electronic communication.












4.8.


People whose work requires electronic communication should also be kept in mind. It is of utmost importance that workers are not obliged to be constantly connected to the internet for work purposes, thus effectively working outside the allocated working time. Reducing such practices through the right to disconnect will help to improve work-life balance, especially among people who work remotely.












4.9.


The situation of workers in the electronically delivered services sector should also be kept in mind. In this context, the recently agreed Platform Work Directive should be noted. The EESC calls for its provisions to be fully implemented.












4.10.


We would also like to point out the problem of not being able to use work e-mail services for trade union activities. The EESC points out that the right to use a company’s e-mail is enshrined in the International Labour Organization’s Convention 135 concerning the protection and facilities afforded to workers’ representatives in undertakings.












4.11.


In order to take the direction set out in this opinion, more stringent requirements will be imposed on regulators. These bodies should therefore be provided with sufficient human and organisational resources and powers to carry out their tasks effectively.






Brussels, 18 September 2024.


The President


of the European Economic and Social Committee

Oliver RÖPKE
               





(1)  
            EU Electronic Communications Code.

(2)  2030 Digital Compass: the European way for the Digital Decade.

(3)  
            COM(2021) 118 final.

(4)  OPENSIGNAL data.

(5)  
            
Report on access to essential services in the EU, Commission staff working document, 2023.

(6)  The EU is a party to the ECHR and its adoption and application is a condition for EU membership.

(7)  
            Resolution A/HRC/47/L.22 The promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights on the Internet
.

(8)  
            Resolution 1987 (2014) The right to Internet access
.

(9)  BEREC Report on Member States’ best practices to support the defining of adequate broadband internet access service, 7 March 2024.

(10)  European Digital Identity Framework.

(11)  The EESC’s Digital Strategy 2024-2026 could be an example.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/6864/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)