Minutes of the Postal Directive Committee Meeting
Internal Market and Services DG
Postal services
Brussels, 29 June, 2009
MARKT/E4 – ES/mt D(2009)
MINUTES OF THE POSTAL DIRECTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
BRUSSELS, 27th April 2009
1. Opening of the meeting
On behalf of the European Commission ("the Commission") Mr. Jörg Reinbothe ("the Chairman") welcomed members of the Postal Directive Committee ("PDC") and opened the meeting.
The Chairman also welcomed the Candidate Countries and EEA representatives who, he recalled, participate as observers and are subject to the same degree of confidentiality as Committee members themselves. Participants were also informed of the mechanism of the meeting being a formal Committee Plenary meeting and that it differs from that of the informal Working group meetings.
In his opening address the Chairman informed those present that travel expenses were to be reimbursed. The Chairman also informed participants that the following documents had been prepared for the meeting and will be sent electronically to all participants after the meeting: (a) the correlation table for Directive 2008/6/EC in line with Recital 60 of Directive 2008/6/EC and the declarations of the Commission (NB: This table has already been provided and Member States are strongly encouraged to use this table), (b) a consolidated version in English, French and German of the Postal Services Directive that the Commission services have elaborated as an informal working tool, and finally c) the Power Point presentations of the meeting.
2. Adoption of the Agenda
The agenda was presented by the Chairman and was approved without comments.
3. Minutes of the last meeting
The Minutes of the previous meeting of 24 October 2008 were approved without comments.
4. Implementation of the 3rd postal directive
Mr. Robert Pochmarski (RP) (European Commission, Directorate General Internal Market and Services, Postal Services Unit) gave a presentation on Implementation Tools. These are the more "technical" aspects of implementation and the means made available to Member States by the Commission according to Article 23a of the Postal Directive. The following three important tools were described. 1) PDC Working Groups were established during 2008, and four meetings have been organised; two last year and two this year at which several external experts have contributed. 2) As many as 13 bilateral meetings have so far been held, and with the implementation at hand by December 2010, some substantial issues were raised at these meetings, which will continue to be organized in the future. 3) A Consolidated version of the Postal Services Directive is now available in three languages and includes all recitals, footnotes, the annexes, and the Commission’s declarations to the European Parliament. The Commission will seek to provide all the other language versions.
4.1 Approach to Implementation
Under this title, the Chairman outlined a forward looking scenario and described the activities that are needed to implement the 3rd Postal Directive in a manner which is faithful to the text and the spirit of EU Postal Reform. On the one hand, the Commission continues to be determined to provide formal and informal assistance to Member States in the implementation of the postal acquis. To this end:
· multilateral Working Groups of the Postal Directive Committee have been established. These tackle all the main regulatory issues and should eventually result in guidance and the identification of best practice;
· bilateral meetings with Member States deal with specific regulatory issues of that Member State concerned by taking into account specificities of these Member States;
· market monitoring is carried out, inter alia, by the Commission and provides an essential mechanism to help implementing the Directive; such market monitoring includes the screening of Member States' laws and practice, the collection of postal statistics, the continued commissioning of sector studies, continued reporting, and the organisation of Postal Conferences – particularly the latter three elements implying close liaising with all stakeholders; and
· where needed, infringement procedures are/will be initiated.
On the other hand, Member States will have to reflect on the following elements:
· The implementation of the Postal Services Directive should be prepared with due respect to its text. It is essential that together we turn from supply-driven to demand-driven postal markets;
· Assessments will have to be made of the existing national postal legislation;
· Such assessments should include consultations with the wider postal sector with a view to establishing a sound and efficient regulatory framework that triggers market entry and contributes to the prosperity of the postal sector;
· Transparent cooperation of Member States with the European Commission (including correlation tables, collection of postal statistics, bilateral meetings);
· Proactive market monitoring;
· Respecting the mandate and independence, and making best use, of National Postal Regulators;
· There has to be a continued pressure on postal incumbent operators as part of active market monitoring in order for the former to become efficient and market-oriented players;
· The implementation deadline of the Directive should be taken as this, namely as a deadline, and not as the appropriate timing for implementation and full market opening. In fact, both the implementation and full market opening should be achieved as soon as possible and in accordance with the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice (notably the International Mail Spain case).
4.2 State of Play - Member States Tour de table
In order to have a better picture of the state of play regarding the implementation of the Postal Services Directive, the Chairman then asked Member States, including EEA and Candidate countries, to indicate progress and planning towards the transposition of the 3rd Directive.
Austria informed the Committee that a new postal law has been drafted and is in the consultation procedure. It is expected that the draft will be adopted by the government during summer 2009.
Belgium has performed ongoing analysis since 2008 and a political agreement was reached on 19 December 2008 on certain issues. The text of the proposed new law is published on the website of the regulatory authority for public consultation and has to be discussed and voted upon by the Belgium Parliament.
Bulgaria has introduced amendments to the postal law, and a public consultation has been carried out. The implementation of the 3rd Postal Directive will be carried out in two steps. The proposed new regulations, in the first step, are intended to strengthen the already existing NRA, to abolish any remaining barriers to entry, and to introduce a transparent licensing procedure. FMO will be accomplished by December 2010. Bulgaria has had bilateral meetings with the European Commission.
The Czech Republic is, through a working party, analysing calculation methods on costs etc and expects to conclude this work by the end of 2009 and to have amendments to the present postal law during the first half of 2010. A bilateral meeting with the Commission on best practices among Member States is envisaged by the Czech Republic.
Denmark indicated that the NRA has analysed the need for postal reform and that the legislative procedure will begin in the autumn of 2009. FMO is envisaged for the middle of 2010.
Estonia has adopted a new Postal law and abolished the reserved area of the postal market on 1 April 2009.
Finland indicated that a working group that was appointed in the autumn of 2008 will present draft legislation in January 2010. The proposal is to be considered by Parliament next spring for new legislation to be in place by autumn 2010. The main issues are the definition of universal service and the financing of any net costs of universal service, together with designation.
France is working actively since spring 2008 to prepare for implementation.
Germany's liberalisation took place in 2008. The 3rd Postal Directive requires slight legal modifications, e.g. concerning Article 4 and will come into force in autumn 2009. There is also a draft law on VAT to be reviewed in view of the preliminary ruling of the European Court of Justice (TNT UK case).
Greece reported that postal reform is well under way and the Ministry will shortly appoint a committee. In March 2009, a conference was held with the participation of all stakeholders, to conclude on market analysis and the powers extended to the NRA.
Hungary indicated that assessments have been performed since 2007. The Government's postal market strategy covers issues such as which market model and financing mechanism to choose. Hungary is expecting input from the Commission. FMO will take place before the deadline.
Ireland reported that a consultation has taken place.
Italy stated that it envisages a delayed procedure concerning e.g. powers delegated to the NRA. A Governmental Working Party is responsible for suggesting a new postal legislation. VAT was mentioned as one example of important issues. Italy envisages keeping the deadline for FMO.
Latvia is expecting the Parliament to approve the new postal law by the end of May 2009 and new regulations to come into force in December 2010.
Lithuania has a new Government with a new action plan. This indicates FMO according to the extended deadline of 31 December 2012.
Luxemburg has started preparatory work for the implementation. Elections will take place in June 2009.
Malta reported on an ongoing review process with public consultation and FMO envisaged for January 2013.
The Netherlands introduced FMO on 1 April 2009 through a new Postal Act, which covers the requirements of the 3rd Postal Directive. An English version of the new legislation is available.
Poland is presently holding consultations and the Government's approval of the new Postal Act is expected during Q4/2009 for the introduction of FMO by the end of 2010.
Portugal is preparing a draft law and FMO is envisaged within the deadline.
Slovakia started its implementation process in 2008 with studies on the scope of the Universal Service, financing mechanism etc. Legal changes regarding hybrid mail will be presented to Parliament in July and in September 2009. FMO is envisaged for 1 January 2013.
Slovenia indicated that preparations have started and that the Government approved of the draft law in April 2009, and sent it to Parliament for adoption in June 2009. FMO is envisaged for January 2011.
Spain reported on the process of creating a well-functioning, independent regulator. Furthermore, the Ministry is working on the wording of the implementation law and expects the new draft law in the Council of Ministers by late June or July 2009. The financing of the USO is also an important issue.
Sweden has started a Ministry Inquiry in December 2008 to examine the postal legislation and to issue a report by 30 September 2009, at the latest. This will then be followed by public consultation for two to three months. A Government Bill is envisaged to be presented in spring 2010 and the new legislation coming into force in December 2010.
United Kingdom has presented a Government Bill that is under consideration by Parliament and it contains e.g. rules on a compensation fund and licensing.
Croatia is currently amending its postal legislation and is taking part in bilateral meetings with the Commission in order to address the main issues in this process.
Iceland is following the EEA-agreement. There is still a reserved area in Iceland and they are now in the process of restructuring the incumbent with the aim of improving profitability.
Norway has made an assessment of the consequences of liberalisation but no decision has yet been taken on when FMO will take place. However, a new Postal Act is being prepared. Norway also reported that it introduced VAT already several years ago.
Turkey proposed new legislation in 2009 and an English version of the proposal was sent to the Commission.
The following countries were not present: Cyprus, Liechtenstein and Romania.
The Chairman made the following observations from the tour de table on the state of play.
· A distinction should be drawn between the preparation for full market opening and the legislative steps needed in this respect on the one hand, and the implementation of the (other) provisions of the 3rd Postal Directive (Directive 2008/6/EC) on the other;
· A number of Member States is taking a proactive attitude to implementation and full market opening. With respect to the latter, the recent developments in the Netherlands are a case in point.
· Excellent constructive contacts have already taken place between the Commission and many Member States;
· Most Member States are well advanced in their preparatory work;
· However, in some Member States, less speed and less transparency can be observed as far as their preparation for implementation and full market opening is concerned;
· There are some cases of non-compliance with the current Postal Directive;
· In some cases, the approach chosen for implementation as presented does not seem to comply with the text and/or spirit of the 3rd Postal Directive;
· This tour de table should be continued so as to share, on a permanent basis, information on the state of play regarding implementation;
· The state of play on implementation will also be a major issue at the Mid Term Review Conference that the European Commission plans to organise later this year.
4.3 Postal Reform Agenda 2009-2012
The Chairman stressed that the implementation process is a joint responsibility of all stakeholders. The success of EU Postal Reform should not be taken for granted. While the adoption of the 3rd Postal Directive presents a decisive step, it is essential now that the objectives of EU Postal Reform are transposed according to its spirit. The Commission is determined to provide assistance to Member States in the implementation phase and beyond. To this end, a medium-term Postal Reform Agenda (2009 – 2012) serves as an outline for the future activities of the Commission, of course in close cooperation with all stakeholders. In this context, the Commission would like to reiterate the importance of continuing the following actions:
· Multilateral meetings in the framework of the Postal Directive Committee, including preparatory work in the informal setting of the Working Groups, so as to arrive at general guidance and identified best practice;
· Bilateral meetings between the Commission and Member States with the objective to provide for individual assistance;