Big tech accountability? Read how we got here in  The Closing of the Net 

The European Parliament has a new rapporteur for Net Neutrality and he has hit the ground running. He is the German MEP Herbert Reul, and the the first thing he  wants to do, is to ask the  Council  of Ministers how it will ensure an Open Internet and net neutrality across the EU. And he has drafted a  resolution on Net Neutrality which the Parliament may eventually vote on. Both items are currently on the agenda for the Industry committee (ITRE).  However, there is concern that the matter will simply end up as a sop to industry,  and act as a further ballast to its non-neutral behaviour in blocking Internet services.


 Essentially, what is happening is that the Parliament has to respond to the Commission’s Communication on Net Neutrality issued in the Spring. Mr Reul will be co-ordinating that response.

 The choice of Mr Reul is an interesting one. He is the chair of the Industry committee and a ‘senior’ MEP. He is German, with an interest in the telecoms industry. He was on the Conciliation committee for the Telecoms Package 3rd Reading.

The Commission’s Communication on Net Neutrality was widely perceived to be a rather timid positioning, giving in to industry rather than taking a strong stand for citizens.

Mr Reul has tabled a question for  the Council, asking its view of the impact of the Telecoms Package in ensuring an open Internet and net neutrality in Europe. Bearing in mind that it was the Council which inserted ‘conditions limiting access to and or use of content, services and applications” into the Telecoms  Package, it is  not clear what lies behind this question or what answer he might expect to get. The Council’s text in the Package was supportive of operators who wanted to do discriminatory  traffic management and block services . Deutsche telekom and the French ISPs blocking Skype, is a good example.  See my coverage at the time the Package was going through:  Users rights and how they may be limited

Mr  Reul’s Resolution is somewhat equivocal. It does have all the usual euphemisms  - no need for regulatory intervention ( well, the operators don’t want intervention); transparency, quality of service and switching as a necessary conditions for net neutrality – well, switching is not possible  in many member states, and  if telling you  how you are being stuffed is a good idea, then may that is the case.

But it also does call for tougher regulatory tools to deal with bad operator behaviour, and reminds the Parliament that discriminatory behaviour by operators can risk infringing freedom of expression.

The Resolution can be amended, and may well be if the political groups in the Parliament take  different positions.

The Citizens advocacy group La Quadrature du Net, together with Bits of Freedom, is launching an autumn campaign urging people to contact their MEPs and ask them to adopt legislation which would ban discriminatory traffic management. La Quadrature is  also  asking  citizens to report blocking and other unreasonable operator behaviour: go to RespectMyNet


Herbert Reul’s oral question to the Council of Ministers on the Open Internet and Net Neutrality in Europe:


What is the Council's opinion on the impact of the 2009 EU telecoms reform package in ensuring an  open internet and net neutrality in Europe?

Furthermore how does the Council want to ensure a common approach to open internet and net  neutrality across the EU?


The proposed European Parliament Motion for a Resolution on Net Neutrality, tabled in the ITRE committee:


Welcomes the communication of the Commission and agrees with the analysis, in

particular on the need of preserving the open and neutral character of the internet;

2. Notes that based on the present analysis there is no clear need for additional regulatory

intervention on net neutrality;

3. Welcomes the work of the BEREC in this area and calls the Member States and in  particular NRAs to work closely with BEREC;

4. Calls on the Member States to ensure consistency in the approach on net neutrality and the

common European approach;

6. Underlines the importance of cooperation and coordination among the Member States and  in particular among the NRAs, together with the Commission, in order for the EU to  benefit from the full potential of the internet;

7. Recognises that reasonable traffic management is required to ensure that the end user's

connectivity is not disrupted by network congestion but calls for transparency in traffic


8. Draws the attention to potential challenges when departing from network neutrality

including anticompetitive behaviour, blockage of innovation, restriction on freedom of

expression lack of consumer awareness and infringement of privacy and that the lack of

net neutrality hurts both businesses, consumers and society as whole;

9. Reminds that the EU regulatory framework aims at promoting effective competition and

therefore any measure in the area of net neutrality should in addition to existing

competition law provide tools to deal with any anti-competitive practices that may emerge

as well as lead to investments and facilitate new innovative business models;

10. Considers transparency, quality of service and ease of switching as necessary conditions

of net neutrality in assuring the end-users of freedom of choice and requests;

11. Asks the Commission to assess the need for additional guidance on net neutrality to

achieve competition and freedom of choice for consumers;

12. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the

governments and parliaments of the Member States.


To find out more about the EU Telecoms Package, please see my book

The Copyright Enforcement Enigma: Internet Politics and the 'Telecoms Package'


Please attribute this article: Monica Horten (2011) Net Neutrality blows in to  EU autumn agenda  26 September 2011 .


Iptegrity in brief is the website of Dr Monica Horten. I’ve been analysing analysing digital policy since 2008. Way back then, I identified how issues around rights can influence Internet policy, and that has been a thread throughout all of my research. I hold a PhD in EU Communications Policy from the University of Westminster (2010), and a Post-graduate diploma in marketing.   I’ve served as an independent expert on the Council of Europe  Committee on Internet Freedoms, and was involved in a capacity building project in Moldova, Georgia, and Ukraine. I am currently (from June 2022)  Policy Manager - Freedom of Expression, with the Open Rights Group. For more, see About Iptegrity is made available free of charge for  non-commercial use, Please link-back & attribute Monica Horten. Thank you for respecting this.

Contact  me to use  iptegrity content for commercial purposes


States v the 'Net? 

Read The Closing of the Net, by me, Monica Horten.

"original and valuable"  Times higher Education

" essential read for anyone interested in understanding the forces at play behind the web."

Find out more about the book here  The Closing of the Net


FROM £15.99

Copyright Enforcement Enigma launch, March 2012

In 2012, I presented my PhD research in the European Parliament.


Don't miss Iptegrity!  RSS/ Bookmark