On Competition Policy (Sharon Bowles MEP)

Sharon Bowles MEP <info@sharonbowles.org.uk>

On Competition Policy

April 3, 2006 12:00 AM
By Sharon Bowles MEP in European Parliament

In 2004, the Commission issued its decision on Microsoft. Press reports since then, concerning attempts at compliance, have presented conflicting information.

This is not the first time that progress, and even the right of defence prior to hearings or to appeal, seems to have been compromised by the Commission denying undertakings access to full information or evidence against them. In effect, undertakings are told: you must do more, but no, you cannot have the evidence and we will not tell you exactly what we want. Is such lack of transparency necessary, useful or, taken to its extreme, even in line with the principles of justice that one associates with an advanced democratic community?

With some reservations, I welcome the Article 82 consultation, which draws on recent experience, but it seems to me that there should also be more consultation with regard to Commission procedures and Regulation (EC) No 773/2004. This should include comparison with other countries, including the United States, keeping our aim of fostering a competitive business and investment environment.

The Microsoft case is particularly difficult because it includes interoperability in a highly technical field. It is very important to define the general procedures for interoperability and it is with some regret that we lost those in the CII Directive. However, the general procedures for interoperability must not be defined by a hard case. Hard cases make bad law, and at present it is even difficult to reconcile the proposals in the consultation document - such as paragraphs 238, 239 and 240 - both with themselves and with the apparent demands on Microsoft. There are also further concerns in paragraph 242, concerning trade secrets.