Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-05-20-Speech-2-454"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080520.33.2-454"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I want to begin by thanking everyone who worked on the MSS decision. I say that not just as the usual courtesy, but because the decision has come to plenary this week as a first-reading agreement thanks to much support from my parliamentary colleagues and the help of the Commission in supplying additional text. I would also like to give warm thanks to the Slovenian presidency, who shared Parliament’s determination to reach an early agreement in the interests of European competitiveness.
In February 2007, Member States agreed to make radio frequency bands in the 2 GHz region available for a harmonised approach to mobile satellite services in order to avoid interference and fragmentation of the internal market and open up the possibility for European MSS technology to become globally competitive. The purpose of today’s MSS decision is to select and authorise the operators of these pan-European mobile satellite services.
In the debate and negotiation on this decision, the differences to overcome have been institutional and geographic, rather than party political. Firstly, MEPs were concerned that in the Commission’s draft proposal there were elements of the selection and authorisation process which were of a political, rather than a purely technical, nature and that it was therefore not appropriate to use comitology to decide the details. In particular, MEPs and ministers from Member States on the periphery of the EU were very concerned that the selection criteria might favour operators who could only provide a service covering the centre of Europe.
MEPs were also concerned that the selection criteria might not reflect Parliament’s frequently expressed commitment to public interest services and to the inclusion of rural and less-developed regions. These difficulties were resolved by bringing into the text detailed and transparent wording on the weighting to be given to geographic coverage, public safety and protection services and the range of services provided to consumers in rural and remote areas.
Particularly important was the compromise reached before the vote in the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, stipulating that all applicants must commit to services covering at least 50% of the population and at least 60% of the aggregate land area of each Member State. While this falls short of the 100% coverage which I know some colleagues would have preferred, I think it offers a realistic compromise given the technical and economic constraints that the industry is under. Furthermore, Member States retain the right to use the spectrum for other purposes where and when it lies outside the mobile satellite service area, and Member States may impose emergency service use of mobile satellite systems during major disasters.
To conclude, I think we have reached a very good and swift agreement which will benefit both citizens and industry. I trust that the final signatures can be put on the deal in June to allow the first call for applications to go out before the summer, and I hope that, next time Member States and the Commission decide they need a pan-EU service in a particular frequency band, they will look to the MSS decision as a model of how to reach a speedy agreement by involving Parliament in the detail of the text."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples