| Background
(i) Communication on "The Information Society: From Corfu to Dublin - The new
emerging priorities"
2.1 This Communication is a short summary which recalls that the June 1994 Corfu
European Council considered that "the importance and complexity of the issues raised by the
new information society justify the setting up of a permanent co-ordination instrument . . . with
a view inter alia to ensuring a co-ordinated approach in the Council." The Commission was
invited to draw up an Action Plan for measures needed at Community level. This plan, entitled
"Europe's way to the Information Society" was presented to the first Information Society
Council on 28 September 1994[2]. The main outcome was that
particular importance was given to the liberalisation of telecommunications.
2.2 The Commission suggests that the Action Plan successfully established a first
framework for EU information society policy and that it now needs to be reviewed. It invites the
European institutions to give their opinions on what it has identified as key policy areas, in time
for a revised plan to be presented to the Dublin European Council. The four areas, which it regards
as being of equal priority, are:
(i) "improving the business environment "
(ii) "investing in the future"
(iii) "people at the centre"
(iv) "meeting the global challenge"
2.3 We here consider three of the four papers on which opinions are invited. The
fourth, a draft directive on "Regulatory Transparency in the Internal Market for Information
Society services" we consider elsewhere in paragraph 12 of this Report. All four papers and
this introducing Communication were presented to the Industry Council on 8 October.
(ii) Communication on "The Implications of the Information Society for European
Union Policies -- Preparing the next steps"
2.4 The industries of the information society are the fastest growing in the world
and are expected to account for 10% of world GDP by the millennium. Europe's performance, according
to the Communication, is strong but patchy. The Commission's detailed comments on the four policy
areas include:
(i) "Improving the business environment"
The commitment to liberalise all telecoms services and networks by 1998
in most Member States is applauded and those Member States holding derogations are encouraged not
to use them in full if at all possible. Attention should now focus on implementation. The
Commission suggests that a specific body to co-ordinate the regulatory function at European level
might be created.
(ii) "Investing in the future"
People and know-how are the main capital base of Europe and the
information society is predominantly a knowledge-based society. Investment must be made in enhancing
the knowledge base by improving education and training.
(iii) "People at the centre"
A better response is needed to people's expectations and concerns. The
Commission suggests a closer integration of structural funds and information society policies to
address social questions, protect consumer interests and improve the quality of public sector
services. Government has a crucial role in encouraging widespread take-up of what the Information
and Communication Technologies (ICTs) have to offer.
(iv)" Meeting the global challenge"
Increasing competitive pressure is prompting a wave of major global
corporate alliances. New market opportunities are opening up which could increase economic growth
worldwide, but effort is needed to define global rules. The Commission considers that, where
multilateral negotiations are not effective, bilateral negotiations must be pursued. EU competition
policy must be based on a dual approach which acknowledges the need for alliances to compete
globally but prevents the foreclosure of markets and reduces dominant positions. It argues that
the EU must make a special effort to integrate the candidate countries, particularly of Central and
Eastern Europe, in its regulatory framework and programmes for the information society.
The Government's view
2.5 In his Explanatory Memorandum (dated 16 October) the Parliamentary Under
Secretary of State for Science and Technology at the Department of Trade and Industry (Mr Ian
Taylor) says that the Government welcomes the emphasis on the importance of telecoms liberalisation:
"The Government agrees that the most valuable service which the political
authorities can perform in this area will be that of setting up a suitable framework within which
private businesses can then take the lead in building the services which will together constitute
the information society, in line with the development of genuine consumer demand for such services.
It is this role rather than one of intervening directly themselves in specific projects which should
be paramount for the Member State governments.
"The Government has reservations about the Commission's suggestion that a
co-ordinated European telecommunications regulator might be established, and would instead favour
greater co-operation between national regulators. The Government strongly welcomes the Commission's
emphasis on the need for timely implementation of Directives, and will be encouraging the Commission
to monitor closely Member States' performance in this area."
(iii) Green Paper - Living and Working in the Information Society: People
First
2.6 Commissioner Flynn launched this paper at a colloquium in Dublin on 30 September.
It reflects growing interest by the Commission in the impact of the new information and
communication technologies on the organisation of work, employment and social cohesion. The
Commission claims that the benefits of the ICTs are unevenly distributed between different parts
of the Union and between citizens. It says that people are demanding to know what the impact will
be on their jobs and on society: "will the complexity and the cost of the new technologies not
widen the gaps between industrialised and less developed areas, between the young and the old,
between those in the know and those who are not?"
2.7 On work organisation the paper says that the trend towards smaller, less
hierarchical and more flexible organisations is beneficial but poses challenges which include how
institutions, such as labour law and regulation, social welfare and contracts and collective
agreements, may need to change to balance between entrepreneurial flexibility and individual
security.
2.8 On employment the challenges set out in the paper include ensuring that
the added value of economic integration and interdependence provided by the "huge structural
improvement" of the Single Market should not be lost through pursuing "the zero-sum game
of beggar-thy-neighbour policies" but rather "a plus-sum game of co-ordinated growth
policy, creating confidence among consumers and investors. Such a growth-orientated policy would
substantially improve the conditions for the development of jobs in the Information Society".
2.9 On social cohesion the paper addresses concerns that the ICTs will create
information 'haves' and 'have-nots'. The challenges here include ensuring that the regulatory
framework does not widen disparities. Provision of a universal service, that is of a minimum set
of services at affordable prices, makes an important contribution. The challenges also include
providing equality of opportunity of access to public electronic services.
The Government's view
2.10 In his Explanatory Memorandum dated 15 October the Minister of State at the
Department of Education and Employment (Lord Henley) says:
"The Government welcomes the Commission's interest in how education, training
and the labour market can be made more responsive to accelerating technological change, and, in
particular, how improved labour market flexibility can play a key role in employment growth. The
Government also supports the Commission putting forward this Green Paper with the purpose of
promoting a wide ranging debate, before considering future policy proposals.
"We particularly welcome the Commission's view that ICT will be a strong force
for employment growth and that, like earlier industrial revolutions, the inevitable job losses will
be outweighed by the potential for innovation and economic growth across a wide range of goods and
services. We also welcome the recognition in the Green Paper that:
-- the balance of entrepreneurial flexibility and individual security
should be based on a person's 'employability' in the labour market, rather than the security of
one specific job;
-- policies towards unemployment have to include active measures to
retrain unemployed people and equip them with relevant skills;
-- that wage moderation is essential to maximising potential growth in
employment.
"Despite its consultative nature, however, there are early signs that the
direction and nature of Commission thinking in this area may be misguided. In particular the Green
Paper:
-- overstates the extent to which job security is a major concern in the
labour market;
-- suggests that macroeconomic policy should make growth the top priority
objective. The Government's belief, based on UK experience, is that growth is best pursued by
improving the way individual markets work and by promoting work incentives against a background of
sound public finances and the achievement of inflation targets as a necessary priority;
-- fails to recognise that 'co-ordinated growth policy' across Member
States may conflict with the aims of markets in promoting healthy competition and improving economic
efficiency;
-- [makes] unsubstantiated and generalised statements about the ability
of Member States' labour laws to respond to changing, and necessary changes in, employment and
labour markets.
"While the Government welcomes the opportunity to discuss these issues and
exchange information and best practice among Member States, the UK could not support any moves for
legislative action in this area at European level. The UK considers that to maximise employment
opportunities within business and industry, it is necessary to allow the utilisation of technology
to develop flexibly the minimum use of cumbersome regulation. This is best achieved within a sound
macro-economic framework environment based on a policy of sound public finances. The UK is already
addressing the issues posed by the Information Society in current education and training initiatives.
Moreover, adoption of a European Community wide policy would not take into account the diversity
of systems and approaches within Member States. Much of the Paper is of more concern to the
relatively inflexible labour market and industrial institutions of some other Member States than
to the UK."
(iv) Communication on Standardisation and the Global Information Society: the European
Approach
Background
2.11 This Communication is concerned with the role which standardisation can play
in the competitiveness and development of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) markets.
It considers how in a rapidly developing market, the best possible conditions can be created for
drawing up essential technical standards. It also indicates how the Commission intends to promote
those aspects for which it has particular responsibility.
The Communication
2.12 The Commission says that the role of technical standards in the creation of
market places in which all manufacturers can compete, in the knowledge that their products meet
accepted technical norms, is well known and plays an important part in the Community's philosophy
for the creation of an effective single market. In this Communication, the Commission emphasises
the particular problems in the context of ICTs, in particular the length of time conventionally
required to produce standards for an industry which is evolving rapidly, and in consequence the need
to recognise the probability that standards will be produced by other means.
2.13 The Communication calls upon European standards organisations to examine the
implications of this for their work, for example by considering the adoption of standards which have
been produced outside their formal structures. The Commission indicates that it will itself examine
standards-related obstacles to the creation of ICT services, protect competition and encourage
non-discriminatory technical specifications and standards. It also calls on Member States to avoid
the creation of new barriers to trade by the adoption of legislation based on divergent
specifications in the ICT area.
The Government's view
2.14 In his Explanatory Memorandum dated 14 October, the Parliamentary Under
Secretary of State for Science and Technology, Department of Trade and Industry (Mr Ian Taylor) says
that the Government welcomes the policy ideas in the Communication and affirms that the European
Telecommunications Standards Institute and other European standardisation bodies should be involved
in the acceptance and endorsement of "Publicly Available Standards"[3] to enhance competitiveness and complementary technologies.
Conclusion
2.15 The issues raised by the Communication on standardisation are of political
importance, but the thoughts expressed by the Commission are not new. We recall that in a
Communication on the broader use of standardisation in Community Policy on which we reported in
February[4], the Commission drew attention to the
difficulties, in some fast-moving areas, for the standards organisations to keep pace with
development and pointed out that some international organisations, such as NATO, produced their own
form of standard specifications. We see no need to recommend a debate specifically on the matters
covered in this document.
2.16 In the words of the Green Paper "we are living through a historic period
of technological change". It is perhaps not surprising that the question of how Governments
respond at national and European level has taken on a political flavour which reflects different
attitudes to how they and the Commission see their role.
2.17 The Commission has sought opinions on a broad range of issues, and it is right
that the House should have an opportunity to express a view. We recommend that the three remaining
documents we have considered here should be debated in European Standing Committee B. Amongst the
questions that arise are:
-- Has the Commission correctly identified the key policy
areas?
-- Is the dual approach which it proposes to adopt on competition policy
appropriate? Should more emphasis be given to one approach or the other (that is, to the need for
alliances to compete globally or to preventing the establishment of dominant positions within the
Single Market)?
-- Is the Commission correct in suggesting that the new information and
communication technologies are a force for exclusion?
-- What practical steps can and should the EU take, and at what level,
to make it easier for its citizens to participate in, and benefit from, the
ICTs?
-- Can the legislative framework be improved? Are
there aspects where legislation is not appropriate?
| 
