Your contact for new licenses
The Mercosur summit will take place in Montevideo on Thursday and Friday. Until recently, the Commission saw the occasion as an ideal time to conclude negotiations on the trade agreement between the EU and the South American trading bloc. On Monday, however, a Commission spokeswoman said that a trip by the Commission President to Montevideo was “not planned.”
But “not planned” does not mean “canceled.” The chairman of the parliament’s trade committee, Bernd Lange (SPD), joked on Tuesday that Ursula von der Leyen should be on the lookout at Brussels Airport today. This was the only way to know whether the deal would be concluded. Success would depend on the work of the negotiators, but also on the political situation in Europe, said Lange.
The Commission’s Head of Trade Sabine Weyand explained in the Trade Committee that the new Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič had intervened in the negotiations at political level yesterday. The technical negotiators had returned from Brazil at the weekend. Work is therefore in full swing on the Commission side.
Yesterday’s debate in the Trade Committee also highlighted the extent to which the Mercosur issue is polarized along national rather than party-political lines. The French MEPs in particular left no doubt about their rejection of the agreement.
The explosive political situation in Paris is likely to be one of the major uncertainty factors hanging over the agreement. Today, Prime Minister Michel Barnier has to face a vote of no confidence in the French National Assembly. But even on the Latin American side, not all countries are in favor of actually concluding the endless negotiations now.
We wish you a productive day!
A new start for the European social dialog? At least that is what employers and trade unions in the various member states are hoping in view of the current negotiations on the new European Social Dialogue Pact. It is one of the first projects in the social sector in Ursula von der Leyen’s new term of office. According to the mission letter from Social Affairs Commissioner Roxana Mînzatu, the target date is “early 2025”. This is when the social partners and the Commission are to sign the pact with its declarations of intent.
The EU Commission has been aggressively promoting collective agreements and social partner negotiations for some time now. However, there have recently been significant rumblings between the social partners. The trade unions accused the employers’ side – in particular the employers’ and lobby association Business Europe – of not having seriously conducted the negotiations on the right to disconnect and the teleworking directive. The work program on social dialogue was also terminated early with reference to this. Business Europe was also the only European social partner not to sign the La Hulpe Declaration, which deals with the future of the EU’s social pillar.
Negotiations on the new “European Social Dialogue Pact” have been underway since November and should be completed by the beginning of December. The results of the negotiations will then be sent to the Commission. The European social partners are involved, i.e. Business Europe (private sector), SGI Europe (public employers), and SME United (SMEs) on the employers’ side. On the employee side is the European Trade Union Confederation ETUC, in which the DGB is also organized.
Livia Hentschel, Head of European Trade Union Policy at the DGB and part of the negotiating delegation, is calling for a genuine strengthening of the European social dialog. One thing is particularly important to the trade unionist: “We need a commitment from the employers’ side in the pact that the social dialog will lead to tangible results,” Hentschel told Table.Briefings.
The Confederation of German Employers’ Associations (BDA) also emphasized the importance of the new social dialogue pact to Table.Briefings. BDA Managing Director Steffen Kampeter explains: “The EU must now put its announcements on strengthening social dialog into practice.”
However, the BDA’s agenda is somewhat different from that of the DGB. Managing Director Kampeter emphasizes that the commission should not take the side of one social partner. “In the past, some one-sidedness has turned the social dialog into rather dry bread, as the commission has not treated trade unions and employers impartially.”
Another important concern of the employers’ side is more freedom. “The autonomy of the social partners and social partner agreements must be respected more than has been the case in the past,” says Kampeter. Employers say that they are annoyed that the Commission is restricting the results of the social dialog and the scope for social partner negotiations too much with very strongly defined legal texts.
However, the wishes of the social partners could be closer together on at least one point: greater involvement of the social partners beyond social policy. “Social dialog is important, but the crucial question is also how we are involved in the day-to-day business of the EU,” says DGB Head of Division Hentschel. Her demand is therefore: “To also be involved in cross-cutting issues, such as energy, industry, and corporate policy issues.” Hentschel criticizes that there is currently hardly anyone with a social policy background on the Regulatory Scrutiny Board, for example.
At the same time, the DGB criticizes contradictory signals from the Commission, particularly concerning the better regulation agenda: “On the one hand, social dialogue is to be strengthened, while on the other hand, employees’ rights are glorified as bureaucracy and calls are made for deregulation.”
In the Val Duchesse Declaration, the Commission, the social partners, and the then Belgian Council Presidency committed to the new social dialog pact at the beginning of 2024. According to the declaration, the following points should also play a role in the new pact Capacity building for the social partners, including for those in accession countries, and better funding, for example through ESF+ funds. In addition: how to deal with the results of the European social dialog in the future.
“What are you doing?” Most of the questions that MEPs in the Internal Market and Consumer Committee (IMCO) put to the two TikTok representatives on Tuesday can be summarized in this short formula. For example: What are you doing to prevent the manipulation of elections and to comply with the rules of the Digital Services Act (DSA)?
During the hour-long discussion, considerably more time was spent on the questions than on the answers from Caroline Greer, Director of Public Policy and Government Relations, and Brie Pegum, Global Head of Product Development, Authenticity and Transparency at TikTok. In the end, the parliamentarians were not satisfied.
One reason for the discussion at IMCO was the recent events surrounding the presidential election in Romania, where there were allegations of election manipulation. The country’s Supreme Defense Council declared on Thursday that it had evidence of cyber attacks that had influenced the election on Nov. 24. According to this, “a presidential candidate” had been given preferential treatment by TikTok, the body explained with regard to the extreme right-wing non-party candidate Călin Georgescu. In addition, Romania was a main target for “hostile actions by state and non-state actors,” particularly from Russia.
In the debate, all facets of the passionate debate outside of parliament were discussed. Representatives of the far right said that the Romanian people had spoken, even if some in Europe did not like the election result. They see an encroachment on freedom of expression if the platform is now required to moderate posts on TikTok.
The EPP, S&D, Renew, and Greens, on the other hand, were convinced that the great power of platforms also comes with great responsibility. This includes, for example, not spreading fake news and preventing algorithms from spreading particularly extreme political messages.
In line with the requirements of the Digital Services Act (DSA), TikTok – like other very large online platforms – has just published its risk assessment and the corresponding audit report including the implementation report from KPMG. The auditors also came to the conclusion that TikTok had made progress and fulfilled many requirements, but not to a sufficient extent.
The overall assessment was therefore “negative with restrictions.” This means that significant improvements are required to ensure full compliance with the DSA. In some areas, such as transparency in advertising or the handling of systemic risks (such as election interference or misinformation), TikTok was unable to fully comply with the required standards, the auditors found.
“The mood in the hearing was angry,” said Katarina Barley (S&D) to Table.Briefings after the session. There was great frustration in the room because the TikTok representatives consistently avoided the MEPs’ questions. It was worrying when a large platform like TikTok systematically ignored questions in Parliament. “Even after repeated requests, we as MEPs were not given any answers,” said Barley.
However, some observers felt that the setting was not ideal. The two TikTok representatives each had to answer a large number of collected questions and had little time to do so. Barley saw things differently. The TikTok representatives had not been interrupted once or otherwise restricted in their speech. “They actively avoided answering the MEPs’ questions. A different format would probably not have changed that.”
As the responsible committee, the parliamentarians now want to submit questions in writing and press for answers. Whether TikTok will be more willing to provide information remains to be seen, said Barley. “If the negative attitude towards parliament persists, we will have to consider tougher measures.”
The Commission was also not forthcoming during the Q&A session. Rita Wezenbeek, Director of Policy and Regulation of Digital Platforms at DG CONNECT, said that she could not provide any information about ongoing proceedings. However, the Commission confirmed that Romania’s National Audiovisual Council has requested a formal investigation into TikTok’s role in the elections.
On Nov. 29, the Commission sent an additional request for information to TikTok. In it, it asked the platform to provide more information about its handling of the risks of information manipulation during the election campaign. On the same day, a round table was also held with Romanian authorities, which was also attended by other platforms such as Meta, X, and Google. The Rapid Response System under the Code of Conduct against Disinformation has been activated, Wezenbeek said.
This system was created before the European elections. It allows civil society organizations to quickly alert the platforms if they see signs of suspected coordinated action or suspect that the platforms are not complying with their own guidelines. This system was also used last weekend during the parliamentary elections in Romania, said the EU official. However, she could not yet say whether it had worked properly.
“The Commission’s work on enforcing the DSA has made quite a good impression so far,” said Barley. However, the Commission’s answers at the hearing were not particularly concrete either. “TikTok plays a decisive role in shaping political opinion online,” Barley continued. “Today we got the impression that neither TikTok nor the Commission take this responsibility seriously enough.”
Andreas Schwab (EPP) said in the run-up to the hearing that the implementation of the DSA required more pressure: “We must become faster.” The new European Commission is urgently required to provide more staff and more options. TikTok not only poses political risks for users, as the app specifically promotes political content, which is particularly worrying. Schwab also referred to the health risks – such as addictive design – especially for minors. “Overall, better implementation of the DSA for platforms such as Tiktok should be a key priority of this new legislative period,” demanded Schwab.
IMCO Committee Chair Anna Cavazzini (Greens) said: “Today we have listened to TikTok’s evasive answers, but above all we have publicly called on the European Commission to act to ensure that the DSA is enforced, especially before elections.”
With the Digital Network Act (DNA), the European telecommunications market is to be turned upside down in places where it actually works. Market consolidation and deregulation are on the wish list, as is the issue of data tolls. All proposals that are clearly contrary to the interests of consumers.
The DNA was first announced in October 2023 by Thierry Breton, the EU Commissioner responsible at the time. As the new Executive Vice-President of the European Commission, Henna Virkkunen now has the opportunity to get rid of this legacy. She should focus on a consumer-friendly agenda that takes a targeted look at the special features of the European telecommunications market, strengthens competition and consumer rights, and ensures net neutrality.
The development of the European telecommunications market (TC market) is a success story. The liberalization of the market ensures the diversity of offers as well as lively and sustainable competition for consumers. The system of sector-specific ex-ante regulation is working. In the debate about the DNA, there is now talk of abandoning the existing regulations in favor of a general, ex-post-competition law. And without any reason to change the functioning system. Markets that are not ready for deregulation would thus be jeopardized and necessary regulation made more difficult.
The former European Commission also seemed to be aiming for market consolidation: with a small number of companies operating across Europe that can compete with the competition from China and the USA. Here, too, there is no evidence that European competitiveness can be strengthened in a global context through market consolidation. On the contrary, there is a risk of monopolistic structures in Europe, which have a negative impact on quality and diversity of supply and increase costs for consumers.
The consequences of comprehensive deregulation can be seen in the USA: The choice for consumers is often limited to one or two providers of telecommunications services. This leads to declining service quality and rising prices.
In addition, the DNA could introduce a data toll through the back door. Current considerations envisage that contract negotiations on peering and transit markets between network operators and content and application providers could be clarified through mandatory dispute resolution. If, for example, Deutsche Telekom as a network operator and ARD as a content provider cannot agree on a price, dispute resolution would be one way of setting a price. This would successfully introduce a data toll through the back door.
Numerous independent regulatory authorities see no need to introduce a new instrument here either. This is because there is no market failure in peering and transit markets. Where there are usually loud calls for deregulation, regulation is suddenly at the top of the agenda. It is clear that the debate will be decided politically. The VZBV calls on the new European Commission to end this debate and promote an open Internet for all.
The DNA proposals under discussion would make the market less attractive for consumers. It would do the current debate good to incorporate consumer rights more strongly. After all, without consumers, there would be no great need for digital infrastructure and its services.
The fact that consumer interests must be included in the reform of the telecommunications market is also evident in the area of fiber optic expansion. There is great potential for optimization here. The connection rate for fiber optic connections is low (in Germany). This is partly due to usage behavior and the high prices. Pushy door-to-door sales can act as a deterrent. In Germany, more than half of citizens live in tenancies and often cannot get a fiber optic connection even if they want to. If these aspects were taken into account, expansion would progress more quickly.
If there are to be extensive reforms to European telecommunications law, sector-specific consumer rights must be strengthened. The competitiveness of the telecommunications market will certainly not fail if providers are legally required to provide good service and treat customers well.
Michaela Schröder heads the consumer policy division of the Federation of German Consumer Organizations (VZBV) and is responsible for the consumer policy areas of digital and media, financial market, health, and care as well as food.
The Mercosur summit will take place in Montevideo on Thursday and Friday. Until recently, the Commission saw the occasion as an ideal time to conclude negotiations on the trade agreement between the EU and the South American trading bloc. On Monday, however, a Commission spokeswoman said that a trip by the Commission President to Montevideo was “not planned.”
But “not planned” does not mean “canceled.” The chairman of the parliament’s trade committee, Bernd Lange (SPD), joked on Tuesday that Ursula von der Leyen should be on the lookout at Brussels Airport today. This was the only way to know whether the deal would be concluded. Success would depend on the work of the negotiators, but also on the political situation in Europe, said Lange.
The Commission’s Head of Trade Sabine Weyand explained in the Trade Committee that the new Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič had intervened in the negotiations at political level yesterday. The technical negotiators had returned from Brazil at the weekend. Work is therefore in full swing on the Commission side.
Yesterday’s debate in the Trade Committee also highlighted the extent to which the Mercosur issue is polarized along national rather than party-political lines. The French MEPs in particular left no doubt about their rejection of the agreement.
The explosive political situation in Paris is likely to be one of the major uncertainty factors hanging over the agreement. Today, Prime Minister Michel Barnier has to face a vote of no confidence in the French National Assembly. But even on the Latin American side, not all countries are in favor of actually concluding the endless negotiations now.
We wish you a productive day!
A new start for the European social dialog? At least that is what employers and trade unions in the various member states are hoping in view of the current negotiations on the new European Social Dialogue Pact. It is one of the first projects in the social sector in Ursula von der Leyen’s new term of office. According to the mission letter from Social Affairs Commissioner Roxana Mînzatu, the target date is “early 2025”. This is when the social partners and the Commission are to sign the pact with its declarations of intent.
The EU Commission has been aggressively promoting collective agreements and social partner negotiations for some time now. However, there have recently been significant rumblings between the social partners. The trade unions accused the employers’ side – in particular the employers’ and lobby association Business Europe – of not having seriously conducted the negotiations on the right to disconnect and the teleworking directive. The work program on social dialogue was also terminated early with reference to this. Business Europe was also the only European social partner not to sign the La Hulpe Declaration, which deals with the future of the EU’s social pillar.
Negotiations on the new “European Social Dialogue Pact” have been underway since November and should be completed by the beginning of December. The results of the negotiations will then be sent to the Commission. The European social partners are involved, i.e. Business Europe (private sector), SGI Europe (public employers), and SME United (SMEs) on the employers’ side. On the employee side is the European Trade Union Confederation ETUC, in which the DGB is also organized.
Livia Hentschel, Head of European Trade Union Policy at the DGB and part of the negotiating delegation, is calling for a genuine strengthening of the European social dialog. One thing is particularly important to the trade unionist: “We need a commitment from the employers’ side in the pact that the social dialog will lead to tangible results,” Hentschel told Table.Briefings.
The Confederation of German Employers’ Associations (BDA) also emphasized the importance of the new social dialogue pact to Table.Briefings. BDA Managing Director Steffen Kampeter explains: “The EU must now put its announcements on strengthening social dialog into practice.”
However, the BDA’s agenda is somewhat different from that of the DGB. Managing Director Kampeter emphasizes that the commission should not take the side of one social partner. “In the past, some one-sidedness has turned the social dialog into rather dry bread, as the commission has not treated trade unions and employers impartially.”
Another important concern of the employers’ side is more freedom. “The autonomy of the social partners and social partner agreements must be respected more than has been the case in the past,” says Kampeter. Employers say that they are annoyed that the Commission is restricting the results of the social dialog and the scope for social partner negotiations too much with very strongly defined legal texts.
However, the wishes of the social partners could be closer together on at least one point: greater involvement of the social partners beyond social policy. “Social dialog is important, but the crucial question is also how we are involved in the day-to-day business of the EU,” says DGB Head of Division Hentschel. Her demand is therefore: “To also be involved in cross-cutting issues, such as energy, industry, and corporate policy issues.” Hentschel criticizes that there is currently hardly anyone with a social policy background on the Regulatory Scrutiny Board, for example.
At the same time, the DGB criticizes contradictory signals from the Commission, particularly concerning the better regulation agenda: “On the one hand, social dialogue is to be strengthened, while on the other hand, employees’ rights are glorified as bureaucracy and calls are made for deregulation.”
In the Val Duchesse Declaration, the Commission, the social partners, and the then Belgian Council Presidency committed to the new social dialog pact at the beginning of 2024. According to the declaration, the following points should also play a role in the new pact Capacity building for the social partners, including for those in accession countries, and better funding, for example through ESF+ funds. In addition: how to deal with the results of the European social dialog in the future.
“What are you doing?” Most of the questions that MEPs in the Internal Market and Consumer Committee (IMCO) put to the two TikTok representatives on Tuesday can be summarized in this short formula. For example: What are you doing to prevent the manipulation of elections and to comply with the rules of the Digital Services Act (DSA)?
During the hour-long discussion, considerably more time was spent on the questions than on the answers from Caroline Greer, Director of Public Policy and Government Relations, and Brie Pegum, Global Head of Product Development, Authenticity and Transparency at TikTok. In the end, the parliamentarians were not satisfied.
One reason for the discussion at IMCO was the recent events surrounding the presidential election in Romania, where there were allegations of election manipulation. The country’s Supreme Defense Council declared on Thursday that it had evidence of cyber attacks that had influenced the election on Nov. 24. According to this, “a presidential candidate” had been given preferential treatment by TikTok, the body explained with regard to the extreme right-wing non-party candidate Călin Georgescu. In addition, Romania was a main target for “hostile actions by state and non-state actors,” particularly from Russia.
In the debate, all facets of the passionate debate outside of parliament were discussed. Representatives of the far right said that the Romanian people had spoken, even if some in Europe did not like the election result. They see an encroachment on freedom of expression if the platform is now required to moderate posts on TikTok.
The EPP, S&D, Renew, and Greens, on the other hand, were convinced that the great power of platforms also comes with great responsibility. This includes, for example, not spreading fake news and preventing algorithms from spreading particularly extreme political messages.
In line with the requirements of the Digital Services Act (DSA), TikTok – like other very large online platforms – has just published its risk assessment and the corresponding audit report including the implementation report from KPMG. The auditors also came to the conclusion that TikTok had made progress and fulfilled many requirements, but not to a sufficient extent.
The overall assessment was therefore “negative with restrictions.” This means that significant improvements are required to ensure full compliance with the DSA. In some areas, such as transparency in advertising or the handling of systemic risks (such as election interference or misinformation), TikTok was unable to fully comply with the required standards, the auditors found.
“The mood in the hearing was angry,” said Katarina Barley (S&D) to Table.Briefings after the session. There was great frustration in the room because the TikTok representatives consistently avoided the MEPs’ questions. It was worrying when a large platform like TikTok systematically ignored questions in Parliament. “Even after repeated requests, we as MEPs were not given any answers,” said Barley.
However, some observers felt that the setting was not ideal. The two TikTok representatives each had to answer a large number of collected questions and had little time to do so. Barley saw things differently. The TikTok representatives had not been interrupted once or otherwise restricted in their speech. “They actively avoided answering the MEPs’ questions. A different format would probably not have changed that.”
As the responsible committee, the parliamentarians now want to submit questions in writing and press for answers. Whether TikTok will be more willing to provide information remains to be seen, said Barley. “If the negative attitude towards parliament persists, we will have to consider tougher measures.”
The Commission was also not forthcoming during the Q&A session. Rita Wezenbeek, Director of Policy and Regulation of Digital Platforms at DG CONNECT, said that she could not provide any information about ongoing proceedings. However, the Commission confirmed that Romania’s National Audiovisual Council has requested a formal investigation into TikTok’s role in the elections.
On Nov. 29, the Commission sent an additional request for information to TikTok. In it, it asked the platform to provide more information about its handling of the risks of information manipulation during the election campaign. On the same day, a round table was also held with Romanian authorities, which was also attended by other platforms such as Meta, X, and Google. The Rapid Response System under the Code of Conduct against Disinformation has been activated, Wezenbeek said.
This system was created before the European elections. It allows civil society organizations to quickly alert the platforms if they see signs of suspected coordinated action or suspect that the platforms are not complying with their own guidelines. This system was also used last weekend during the parliamentary elections in Romania, said the EU official. However, she could not yet say whether it had worked properly.
“The Commission’s work on enforcing the DSA has made quite a good impression so far,” said Barley. However, the Commission’s answers at the hearing were not particularly concrete either. “TikTok plays a decisive role in shaping political opinion online,” Barley continued. “Today we got the impression that neither TikTok nor the Commission take this responsibility seriously enough.”
Andreas Schwab (EPP) said in the run-up to the hearing that the implementation of the DSA required more pressure: “We must become faster.” The new European Commission is urgently required to provide more staff and more options. TikTok not only poses political risks for users, as the app specifically promotes political content, which is particularly worrying. Schwab also referred to the health risks – such as addictive design – especially for minors. “Overall, better implementation of the DSA for platforms such as Tiktok should be a key priority of this new legislative period,” demanded Schwab.
IMCO Committee Chair Anna Cavazzini (Greens) said: “Today we have listened to TikTok’s evasive answers, but above all we have publicly called on the European Commission to act to ensure that the DSA is enforced, especially before elections.”
With the Digital Network Act (DNA), the European telecommunications market is to be turned upside down in places where it actually works. Market consolidation and deregulation are on the wish list, as is the issue of data tolls. All proposals that are clearly contrary to the interests of consumers.
The DNA was first announced in October 2023 by Thierry Breton, the EU Commissioner responsible at the time. As the new Executive Vice-President of the European Commission, Henna Virkkunen now has the opportunity to get rid of this legacy. She should focus on a consumer-friendly agenda that takes a targeted look at the special features of the European telecommunications market, strengthens competition and consumer rights, and ensures net neutrality.
The development of the European telecommunications market (TC market) is a success story. The liberalization of the market ensures the diversity of offers as well as lively and sustainable competition for consumers. The system of sector-specific ex-ante regulation is working. In the debate about the DNA, there is now talk of abandoning the existing regulations in favor of a general, ex-post-competition law. And without any reason to change the functioning system. Markets that are not ready for deregulation would thus be jeopardized and necessary regulation made more difficult.
The former European Commission also seemed to be aiming for market consolidation: with a small number of companies operating across Europe that can compete with the competition from China and the USA. Here, too, there is no evidence that European competitiveness can be strengthened in a global context through market consolidation. On the contrary, there is a risk of monopolistic structures in Europe, which have a negative impact on quality and diversity of supply and increase costs for consumers.
The consequences of comprehensive deregulation can be seen in the USA: The choice for consumers is often limited to one or two providers of telecommunications services. This leads to declining service quality and rising prices.
In addition, the DNA could introduce a data toll through the back door. Current considerations envisage that contract negotiations on peering and transit markets between network operators and content and application providers could be clarified through mandatory dispute resolution. If, for example, Deutsche Telekom as a network operator and ARD as a content provider cannot agree on a price, dispute resolution would be one way of setting a price. This would successfully introduce a data toll through the back door.
Numerous independent regulatory authorities see no need to introduce a new instrument here either. This is because there is no market failure in peering and transit markets. Where there are usually loud calls for deregulation, regulation is suddenly at the top of the agenda. It is clear that the debate will be decided politically. The VZBV calls on the new European Commission to end this debate and promote an open Internet for all.
The DNA proposals under discussion would make the market less attractive for consumers. It would do the current debate good to incorporate consumer rights more strongly. After all, without consumers, there would be no great need for digital infrastructure and its services.
The fact that consumer interests must be included in the reform of the telecommunications market is also evident in the area of fiber optic expansion. There is great potential for optimization here. The connection rate for fiber optic connections is low (in Germany). This is partly due to usage behavior and the high prices. Pushy door-to-door sales can act as a deterrent. In Germany, more than half of citizens live in tenancies and often cannot get a fiber optic connection even if they want to. If these aspects were taken into account, expansion would progress more quickly.
If there are to be extensive reforms to European telecommunications law, sector-specific consumer rights must be strengthened. The competitiveness of the telecommunications market will certainly not fail if providers are legally required to provide good service and treat customers well.
Michaela Schröder heads the consumer policy division of the Federation of German Consumer Organizations (VZBV) and is responsible for the consumer policy areas of digital and media, financial market, health, and care as well as food.