Memorandum by the Committee for the Future
(Council of State report on the Commission communication to the
Grand Committee)
The Committee's Positions
GROUNDS
1. EU preparation of the matter exceptional
The Committee for the Future draws attention first
to the exceptional nature of the EU's preparation of this matter.
This may in part explain why the content of the Commission's communication
is of only minor novelty in relation, on the one hand, to Information
Society trends and strategies in the most advanced EU member countries
in the field and, on the other, to trends in the competing country,
the United States.
Normally matters of this sort are prepared in
the Commission and the relevant administrative preparatory bodies
in the member countries. In this case the responsibility for the
preparation has belonged primarily to the presiding country—in
such a way, however, that the Commission has prepared a so-called
progress report for the Lisbon summit meeting hurriedly, on the
basis of the eEurope communication. The problem is that the communication
itself was not considered by the European Council, while national
organs responsible for the issues did not have an opportunity
to take positions on the eEurope initiative's objectives, either.
In other words, positions are being taken now on the eEurope communication's
progress reports and action proposals with the summit meeting
in mind, and only then will positions be taken on the communication,
which enunciates the objectives. For this reason, problems have
appeared in preparation and the formulation of positions at the
national level. The inadequacy of the few months' time allotted
for drafting the progress reports in the wake of the issuance
of the eEurope communication represents a problem of its own.
Presumably, however, the Member States will
submit the requested comments simultaneously on both of the two
types of progress reports (the presiding country's and the Commission's)—as
well as the e-Europe communication, without its having been considered
by the Council. In the background is the Helsinki summit meeting's
decision giving the Commission and the Council the task of preparing
a progress report for the Lisbon summit.
The member countries can commit themselves to
the objectives of the eEurope communication and its progress reports
only if the member countries have had the opportunity to consider
those objectives properly. Because of the complexity and exceptional
nature of the preparatory phase, Finland's position has remained
vague. The Committee for the Future nevertheless considers the
subject of the utmost importance and will raise several issues
in its statement.
2. Examples of US government objectives to
which the EU communication must be proportioned in the global
economy
In the fields of the economy, employment and
especially IT, the disparity between the United States and Europe
has been allowed to become too large in the 1990s. The communication's
point of departure should clearly be those objectives and measures
by which this gap will be eliminated very quickly.
The communication is good in that it focuses
on subjects important to the citizen. Proceeding from this basis,
it is natural that the communication gives abundant attention
to activity by public authorities that serves the citizen—that
activity including the on-line transaction of business, for example.
In terms of longer-term prerequisites for the well-being of Europe,
however, this chosen approach may also have become the communication's
weakness. The communication is not adequately able to challenge
the United States in what might be termed the toughest areas of
IT—the digital economy, e-commerce and online business-to-business
dealings. Discussion of both research in the field and the commercial
exploitation of innovations has not been adequate, either. Nor
has adequate attention been given to accelerating the establishment
of new companies in the field, and, as an element of the intensifying
global competition, increasing the size of the small businesses
now operating in the field. Generally, the communication has pushed
the consideration of the business economy—the private sector—into
the background. However, the information society can offer the
good services which the communication clearly outlines for the
citizenry only if the EU and its member countries succeed in the
new economy and manage to create jobs and thus make the citizens
wealthier. If the structural change in the economy is not controlled,
and IT, as a factor which pervades all the production and service
sectors, is not utilised fully, we are likely to face a situation
in which Europe, in spite of its high level of expertise and good
capabilities in IT, will not be able to realise the objectives
of the public good which the communication enunciates.
On 9 March 2000, following this week-long visit
to the United States, Enterprise and Information Society Commissioner
Liikanen, who bears responsibility for this question, noted that
"with the aid of e-commerce, businesses in the United States
have achieved a cost savings of as much as 10 per cent, even in
traditional sectors. This is changing the businesses' operating
dynamics and the structure of the whole economy." It is precisely
here, on the question of structural change in the economy, production,
and working life, that the Communication should have treated its
subject more incisively.
The clear differences in approach and emphasis
in the public discussion of the field in Europe and the United
States come in focus when we compare the words and initiatives
of a number of the central players. The US Department of Commerce,
for example, has devoted a tremendous amount of resources to studying
the digital economy's impacts at the level of the national economy,
the company's finances, and general social implications. It is
revealing that, while Europeans have much to say about social
exclusion, the United States is talking about the so-called digital
divide, in reference to which the survival possibilities of various
parties and strata are evaluated on the basis of the economy.
The challenges of the new economy, technology and innovation are
placed before the national economy, businesses, training, research,
the federal government and, always, the individual. For policy
in the first years of the 21st century, the Department of Commerce
has established rigorous training objectives or identified such
important trends as the following ("The Digital Economy,"
www.ecommerce.gov):
— By 2006 half of the private-sector
labour force will be in IT production (hardware and services)
or in industry, which is a large-scale user of IT.
— The salary gap between information
workers and other workers is now great, but it will increase at
an extreme speed in the first part of the 21st century. In 1997,
an average IT worker in the private sector earned USD 53,000 yearly,
but other workers in the sector earned only about USD 30,000 on
average. The highest salaries are commanded by software workers,
whose earnings average USD 59,000.
— Fields that utilise IT pay 13 per
cent higher salaries than other industrial fields.
— The need for highly trained workers
will grow fundamentally by 2006—a 60 per cent increase from
1996 to 2006 is forecast. During the same period, the need for
less educated workers (programmers and the like) will decrease.
— The shortage of labour is an impediment
to growth. Although, for example, the number of students in university-level
four-year computer science programmes has doubled in three years,
the national labour supply is not adequate. More experts than
before will have to be imported (100,000 high-tech experts annually
on special visas). During the 1990s there were about a million
immigrants and a great number of illegal immigrants.
— In order to keep up with developments,
US states and regions have to implement quick structural solutions
independently. The State of Maryland, for example, has decided
to double its educational places for highly trained information
workers.
3. Finland must adopt a level of objectives
much more demanding than the EU's
If Finland intends to be able to keep pace with
trends in IT, it must pursue objectives more demanding than those
that the communication presents. Examined from the standpoint
of current standards in Finland and the Nordic countries generally,
the first point alone, on bringing European youth into the digital
age, reveals the modesty of objectives. The EU is establishing
the goals of equipping all teachers with technical possibilities
for the Internet by the end of 2002, and of making fast Internet
connections available to all pupils in their classrooms by the
same date.
The point of departure is the old-fashioned
idea of collective use (ie Internet use by a school or class)
based on a fixed network—a computer and a fixed telephone
or cable. Finnish thinking has for years emphasised the importance
of personal Internet and other data communications links that
travel with the individual. The whole thinking is different. Internet
links and the services they provide are constructed with an emphasis
on mobile links. Computer-based connections are needed, but, alongside
them, the latest technical possibilities must also be given realistic
consideration throughout Europe, especially when the objective
is to expand the coverage of Internet connections in Europe rapidly.
The communication establishes objectives for
citizens and official authorities respecting the transaction of
business online. Here the gap between the EU and Finland is substantial.
Finland is the first country in the world to have developed a
smart card for the citizen through legislation, and the health-care
system will be getting its own smart card this autumn as a result
of the Satakunta macro pilot project. At the same time, it has
been decided to oblige official authorities to produce their services
electronically. Couldn't the communication, for example by referring
to so-called best practices, have presented other European countries
with ways in which governments or parliaments can further the
progress of IT, as in Finland, by establishing clear, binding
norms? Within a few years, authorities in Finland will be obliged
to make all their possible services available to citizens in electronic
form, too. In legal terms, an objective which binds the authorities
is often substantially more effective than other means of guidance.
That presumably also holds true in the electronic automation of
Europe, at least so far as the public sector is concerned.
Perhaps the most important thing is to establish
ambitious objectives from the standpoint of Europe's future competitiveness,
on the basis of the global economy's points of departure. The
communication should have concentrated clearly on those areas
of IT in which Europe, largely through the Nordic member states,
holds an edge over the United States. Those areas include at least
the following:
— Internet and other communications
based on cell phones;
— services in wireless communications
and IT;
— digitalisation and especially its
use with television;
— smart card technology and its applications;
— construction of future "smart"
houses and flats equipped with modern data technology;
— technology and expertise connected
with health-care, ageing and, generally, so-called welfare services
(eg gerontechnology and so-called welfare clusters).
Of these areas, one of the newest and most promising
from Finland's perspective is the application of data technology
to the construction of houses in an entire residential area. The
application represents the forefront of developments in the field
world-wide. The Arabianranta project in Helsinki provides an example.
IBM, Nokia, Sonera, Digia and Symbia have announced that they
have joined together to plan the Helsinki Wireless Virtual Village,
a residential and office neighbourhood that will serve the communications
needs of the future and act as a proving ground for the field's
latest solutions. Plans call for making use of the experiment
elsewhere in the world.
The information economy will not function without
experts. The shortage of skilled workers in the field is already
severe. Germany, for example, has decided to bring 20,000 information
experts into the country through special measures. The need is
estimated at 100,000. Germany meanwhile has millions of unemployed
workers. It is estimated that Europe has a half million open positions
in the information industry, and it is believed that the number
will triple by 2002. The communication did not give adequate consideration
to the simultaneous occurrence of a structural labour shortage
and the joblessness of 10 million Europeans.
4. Actions are more important than general
objectives
In summary, the committee concludes that the
Commission's communication "eEurope—an information
society for all" is to be supported, even although it does
not really introduce anything new that would fundamentally enhance
Europe's competitiveness in the markets of the electronic, virtual
world. But because actions alone are decisive, a good model for
progress in the matter might have several levels, as follows:
1. In accordance with the initiative, broad-based
measures that concern everyone will be implemented. These measures
will promote general capabilities for success in the Information
Society.
2. At the same time, however, a few well-prepared
top-priority projects equipped with adequate resources will be
implemented. These projects will be directed at the development
of data network content and methods, for which the best European
resources will be assembled and through which the general objectives
of point (1) will assume concrete form.
3. Particular weight will be given to the
sectors in which Europe is already ahead of its competitors, and
to projects in those sectors.
From Finland's standpoint, important subjects
which are close to the citizen, in which Finnish expertise is
very advanced by European standards, but in which substantial
further measures are at the same time imperative, include the
following among others:
4. A computer driver's licence which supports
the learning of basic IT capabilities and is intended for all
citizens. The licence idea's next developmental phase should be
an "advanced driver's licence" that supports the development
and introduction of collaborative web-based methods.
5. Development of modes of supplementary
training to support a uniform learning strategy for the individual
and his or her work community. Supplementary training programmes
developed and introduced by universities—so-called professional
development programmes—constitute a good function for the
development work.
6. Utilisation of the potential offered by
digital television as an aid in both work-place-specific and independent
individual learning, the idea being that the development work
takes place in close conjunction with virtual university and virtual
school projects that are under way.
The role of the EU and nation-states in the
creation of the Information Society must be considered closely.
Is there reason for the State to be active and if so, in what
fields and by what means? In the Nordic countries, too, various
directions in such things as the construction of data network
links can be seen today. In Finland it is thought that, for the
State, opening the market to the data networks' end use is enough
of a task. In Sweden, by contrast, the Ministry of Trade and Industry
is planning to build a broad-band network that will cover the
whole country.
Last year, according to the so-called Information
Society index developed by the International Data Corporation,
Finland's Information Society environment was the world's second
most-advanced after the United States'. The index, which depicts
55 countries, incorporates information from more than 20 qualitatively
monitored component areas. According to the comparative study
made at the beginning of 2000, Sweden had risen to first place,
the United States was second and Finland had dropped to third.
What has Sweden, as a country comparable to our own, been doing
better than us? How have the different players contributed to
the situation? From the policy-making perspective it is interesting,
for example, that Sweden, through tax relief aimed at workers
and employers, has achieved the world's highest density of computers
in home use.
Since the EU's different programmes encompass
thousands of active projects relevant to the initiative's substance,
the initiative's implementation programme should emphasise the
dissemination of the results of projects already under way. Appropriations
should be directed much more so than before to the documentation
and dissemination of so-called practices, in a form that can easily
be utilised in various parts of Europe.
When the EU prepares its various directives
and objective programmes, we should be assured of a functional,
uniform set of norms for the advancement of e-commerce and IT
in general. Special attention must be given to the fact that the
need which prevails in the EU for top-down regulation does not
hinder the development of these fields.
5. Values and attitudes should be taken into
account, too
Through policy we can influence the values and
attitudes of a society. In Finland the mood and attitude concerning
IT has been favourable. The situation is however quite different
elsewhere in Europe. AT IST99, the EU's largest information society
event, held in Finland in the autumn of 1999, consideration was
given to EU barometer results respecting popular opinions about
IT. Quite generally, more than 60 per cent of different groups
opposed all new technology regardless of the fact that the respondents
were furnished with examples of how the Internet, cell phones
and other technologies benefit them in their work, at home, and
in different life situations.
Differences appeared among the Nordic countries,
too. In Denmark the national consumer agency carried out a major
survey directed at consumers. Surprisingly, the study revealed
that, on a great number of points, as many as 80 per cent of all
Danes took a negative or extremely cautious view of new technology,
including e-commerce.
If we want Europe to advance more quickly in
the area of IT—particularly in the exploitation of IT throughout
society—we must begin with values and valuations.
STATEMENT
As its statement, the Committee for the Future
respectfully concludes:
— that this matter is so important
to the economy and well-being of Finland and Europe that it is
essential to attend effectively to the matter's future preparation
in spite of the exceptional nature of the preparation of the communication
to date;
— that, once the Member States have
considered the e-europe communication and committed themselves
to its objectives, the Commission and the Council, during Portugal's
presidency, will prepare an action programme on the information
society and its economic basis, taking into account the very varied
stages of development in the member countries;
— that the objective level, starting
from that in Europe's best countries, must be raised considerably
higher, because only in this fashion can we think of the communication's
goal of catching up with the United States as an objective;
— that, in additional to the public
sector, the examination should encompass and give due weight to
the private sector's problems, for which the public sector can
contribute solutions and thus improve the IT field's developmental
prerequisites; and
— that, at the community level, the
EU must accelerate measures which will provide infrastructure
and a good operating environment for e-commerce and other online
activity.
Helsinki
15 March 2000
Chairman Martti Tiuri /kok
Vice Chairman Kalevi Olin /sd
Members: Jouni Backman /sd, Leena-Kaisa
Harkimo /kok, Susanna Huovinen /sd, Reijo Kallio /sd, Kyösti
Karjula /kesk, Jyrki Katainen /kok, Markku Markkula /kok, Rauha-Maria
Mertjarvi /vihr, Petri Neittaanmaki /kesk, (osittain),
Juha Rehula /kesk, (osittain), Esko-Juhani Tennila /vas.
The secretary of the Committee Paula Tihonen,
Committee counsellor.
|
