Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-05-09-Speech-1-076-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110509.18.1-076-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, this is a clear wake-up call and I think that this is really the language that Europe needs. I must say a word of thanks from my side, in particular, to the rapporteur, Mr Hökmark, for the hard work that he has done on the first radio spectrum policy programme.
Turning to the content of the report, the Commission can support, sometimes subject to small modifications, almost all of Parliament’s approach. The Commission particularly welcomes and agrees with the position taken in the report on a couple of issues. Firstly, the importance of spectrum for the Digital Agenda to provide all citizens with high broadband access. No doubt about that, we are completely on your side.
Number two: keeping under review the possibilities for additional spectrum to meet the growing consumer demand for wireless broadband. Completely on your side and, even if your speed is perhaps a little bit higher, be assured that we are aware that that is the next step.
Thirdly, confirming 2013 as the date to free the 800 MHz digital dividend band, while recognising the need for derogations until 2015. So 2013 is the goal, but with a possibility of derogations until 2015, in exceptional technical circumstances as well as further derogations due to coordination issues with third countries, which I was touching upon earlier.
Fourthly, the coverage of other important Union policies beyond electronic communications: here, I am talking about the environment, transport or research and the need to make a substantial amount of spectrum available.
Fifthly, the importance of an efficient inventory of spectrum use, which is an essential part of building an effective and forward-looking policy programme.
Sixthly, the need to coordinate the promotion of EU policies at an international level and to support the Member States in their negotiations with non-EU countries.
There are a number of other important issues where the report is supportive or reinforces the Commission proposal, and that is encouraging. On certain amendments, however, the Commission has to be a bit more nuanced. On restructuring, the presentation of principles and objectives should not reduce the visibility of the principle of efficient use of spectrum, which should apply to all sectors to the greatest extent possible. Another nuanced issue: while I understand the addition of the need to ensure sufficient spectrum for audiovisual services, that should not single out specific modes of delivery.
Another nuance between the Commission and the rapporteur’s report concerns competition. Reserving spectrum for new entrants may be an appropriate tool in certain cases, but with a view to avoiding unnecessary procedures; we would then be close to each other. Another issue again involving just a nuance: while the compensation of migration costs by Member States is a very important issue – no doubt about that – it must be in conformity with State aid rules. I think there is no difference between our points of view; it is something that has to be mentioned.
The Commission has slight difficulties in accepting just two proposals. Number one: for spectrum already technically harmonised, an obligation to authorise its use by 2012 should not be replaced by the softer obligation to make such spectrum available. Existing positions already require this, and we need to move to effective licensing of the spectrum: going forward and not going backward.
A second issue that is different and that we have difficulty in accepting concerns spectrum for broadband satellite access; the Commission wants to be able to actually ensure its availability. On both of those issues – to authorise and to ensure availability on both of those issues – there must be a solution to be found and I am certain that it could be found.
This is about information and technology and it is about making up your mind what position Europe should take: the far East, the far West, in between, there are a couple of important players in this game, but Europe can indeed be the number one.
Just a couple of remarks to conclude. Both Parliament and Commission recognise that an early adoption of the proposal is desirable, considering the importance of the work ahead to implement this programme. A clear statement is needed, the sooner the better. The Commission will do its best to support the process and I am absolutely confident that Parliament will engage in an early dialogue with the Council to reach a rapid and a successful conclusion.
Time is running out. Time is not our friend in this and, at the end of the day, if we want to have a solution and if we are backing the number one position called for by Mr Hökmark, then we need to go as quickly as possible in that direction.
The programme is essential for a digital Europe and for the European economy and for our society as a whole. It is quite clear from this report that Parliament shares the Commission’s view on the importance of a coordinated and effective spectrum policy to meet broadband targets.
And indeed it is vital to maintain and improve Europe’s economic and competitive position and to maximise its social and cultural impact by enabling innovative services for the benefit of citizens. And I would like to add the term ‘cultural’ impact, as this is quite important. If we are talking about the Internet, it is one of the main instruments to give more opportunities to the members of Europe’s community to have the inside knowledge and inside view of cultural impact.
What was rightly mentioned is that this is a moment of choice. It is not any more a question of nice words, but now is the moment of truth and now we have to take our responsibilities. You cannot get a number one position, which is indeed the leader’s role, if you are not taking the choices that need to be taken.
Talking about the cultural aspects, it is that cultural element that I want to emphasise first because I know that this has been a significant preoccupation of Members of your Parliament.
By the way, I see a lot of synergies between the use of spectrum for the distribution of content and culture, especially talking about audiovisual media content and for wireless broadband. Digital television and wireless broadband can develop successfully in parallel and we should not forget that broadband Internet access also offers high cultural and social value. In addition, wireless is essential in areas currently deprived of such access.
The proposal not only protects the existence, but also ensures the future development, of those valuable cultural and economic services which, by the way, produce rich media content and feed future data highways with attractive cultural offerings. Of course, remaining obstacles such as interference on air or on cable TV will have to be solved; there is no doubt about that.
We are all aware that broadcasting knows no borders. European Union policies will need appropriate support in international negotiations and Member States may also need assistance to negotiate with neighbouring non-EU countries. Just through preparing the whole debate, I am, of course, already in contact with certain ministers in certain Member States that are even more confronted with the neighbouring country aspects."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples