The EC role in Europe’s telecom regulatory scheme needs rethinkin...

framework elements that have taken the politics out of regulation: (1) Independent national regulators. (2) Spectrum reform. (3) Alignment of remedies with competition law. (4) Access to full substantive appeals to expert bodies. (5) The “3-criteria” test for deciding if a particular national telecom market needs pre-emptive (ex ante) regulatory intervention. But Ryan urged substantial reform in the “Art. 7” process under which national regulators assess competition in 18 specific markets because EC interference is causing headaches, Ryan said. Most commenters, including the European Commission, European Regulators Group and many firms, call the Art. 7 process administratively burdensome and in need of streamlining, he said. But Vodafone believes the EC is the real problem, he said, because it acts in ways that suggest it’s involved in the process yet has no accountability for it. “Comments” by the EC on proposed national market assessments assume the status of “decisions” or “approvals” in disputes, he said: In effect, the Commission uses Art. 7 letters and press releases to make back-door policy while insisting it’s not involved. The EC can’t be “half-pregnant,” Ryan said: If it’s going to intervene, it must be accountable for its actions. Vodafone also questions the need for keeping the mobile access market within the Art. 7 process. Access is the only element of Vodafone’s market not regulated and, given the “fiercely competitive” nature of Europe’s mobile market, it should be off the ex ante list, he said. An audience member from the Spanish regulator said her study showed that half of all regulatory problems result from industry lobbying. Ryan said his lobbying efforts are aimed at removing market barriers, not more regulatory intervention.