Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-05-17-Speech-3-260"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000517.12.3-260"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, deregulation in the telecommunications sector has continued for a decade and it has been a great success. The traditional telephone as we knew it is now a fading memory. In the past, people acquired a telephone in order to keep in touch with each other, but now they have become shareholders in a company, which could, for example, be acting as an intermediary in sexual services. I am sure this has come as a surprise to many. The instrument itself is so tiny that it could, for instance, be inadvertently placed in the mouth, being mistaken for false teeth; in this respect, too, things have changed a lot.
Deregulation created fears of a fall in standards of public services and an increase in telephone charges. This has not happened, however, and instead services have become diversified and prices have fallen. Money to finance all this has, of course, been generated by new data terminal equipment, networks and services. The 1988 regulatory package was well timed and – due to its efficient implementation – worked well in several Member States. In some countries, however, implementation has been slow and even formal. We would support action by the Commission to improve cross-border services and honest competition. We are concerned at the fact that the limited supply of user access has prevented many user groups – in particular those with lower resources – from taking full advantage of, for instance, reasonably affordable Internet access. Therefore, we need new alternative loop systems, we must facilitate the development of wireless local loop systems and also, for instance, the use of a cable TV network, without having to resort to specific legislation on this issue, however. Parliament notes that due to the variations in its implementations, the current regime has led to legal uncertainty in different Member States. Sufficient transparency on the specific conditions for operating licences is required, so that undue delays in the approval process can be prevented.
The most important reform strategy of the European Union is a reform initiative called
Europe, the framework of which was recently approved in Lisbon. The Commission must be congratulated on the fact that the structure and strategy of the European information society differ in a positive way from others in that it has not only taken account of competitiveness, but also of elements such as cohesion, social equality and employment. The objective is to prevent social discrimination and to increase consumer confidence and social cohesion. This initiative is impressively entitled: “An Information Society For All”.
The radio spectrum is a scarce natural resource which has now started to come up for auction. We take a negative view of this with the exception of certain special instances. We were aware, as early as two years ago, that the GSM auction in the USA had resulted in a state of chaos, i.e. bankruptcies. Experiences from India are equally bad. Those in favour of auctioning believe it to be a good means of controlling resources. We think it will lead to increases in user tariffs and delays in the spreading and development of communications services. Prices at auction have now become incredibly high, and these will be passed on to the consumers, resulting in a new telecommunications tax. This would be an unfair tax, in that it would be the same for both rich and poor. Now that the
Europe initiative – with all its worthy objectives – has just been approved, it is being obstructed by the imposition of a new ‘digital divide’, a greedy fee-charging principle. In practice, this means that our priority project, the development of an information society, is now being obstructed through taxation. This is cause for concern, which, in my opinion, should be looked into in greater detail. I therefore request that the Commission investigate, without delay, the impact of this, the auctioning principle, in different countries, in order that we should have more information on which to base our opinion. Furthermore, this principle will privilege big operators, who will start dividing up the market. In the end, there will be the fear that as we reduce regulations, i.e. deregulate, these big operators will make mutual agreements and ‘reregulate’, creating new regulations. This cannot be right."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"e"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples