I received a personal reply from one of my Scottish MEP's yesterday, which was nice. He is Alyn Smith (Scottish National Party). His reply suggested that he was aware of the issues involved and that he planned to continue the fight for internet freedom in the future.
None of the other six Scottish MEP's bothered to respond.
At the end of his email Alyn attached this press release...
FOR IMMEDIATE USE: WEDNESDAY 22 APRIL 2009
ATTENTION: NEWSDESKS
SMITH DELIGHT AS EU PARLIAMENT COMMITTEE BACKS INTERNET FREEDOM
Alyn Smith MEP, alternate member of the European Parliament's powerful
Industry, Research and Energy Committee, has expressed his pleasure with
the vote on the Telecoms Package as a victory for fundamental rights of
access to the internet.
The committee overwhelmingly approved an amendment to the Trautmann
Report which asserts that "no restriction may be imposed on the
fundamental rights and freedoms of end users" (without a prior ruling by
judicial authorities, or when public security is threatened), and
references the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. This
amendment will make it very difficult to introduce laws that would allow
internet service providers or governments to cut off users' internet
access without a proper and independent judicial process, and came in
the teeth of opposition particularly from the French, who wanted to see
a much more onerous inspection and access regime.
Speaking after the vote, Mr Smith said:
"This is fantastic news, and shows that the Parliament is on the side of
our citizens and on the side of internet freedom.
"I'm delighted that the Parliament has continued to uphold its position
that it adopted at first reading back in September, which I supported.
Access to the internet is absolutely essential for people and
businesses. I am deeply worried by proposals in France and elsewhere to
impose a so-called
"graduated access" or "three strikes and you're out" model, where a
user's internet access can be blocked for minor violations of copyright.
Not only is this a violation of basic freedoms, but the comprehensive
surveillance of internet users it implies is absolutely unacceptable in
a free society. We can only begin to contemplate such drastic action
after serious violations of criminal law, and only through a rigorous
judicial process which is completely independent of corporations or
governments.
"I firmly believe in the principle of "net neutrality": internet access
must be comprehensive, complete and universal, with no restrictions
apart from actual violations of criminal law, and no surveillance of
internet users. I will oppose all attempts to restrict access for users.
"Unfortunately, due to French pressure, the member state governments are
still likely to act as a roadblock on this issue. I urge the Council to
approve this amendment as soon as possible so we can vote it through
plenary and make it law. Europe's internet users demand and deserve
nothing less."
ENDS
Edited to add...
And a reply from the Conservative MEP, John Purvis, although he has a slightly different take on things
Dear (sandbender)
Thank you for your email raising concerns about the Telecoms Package. I
appreciate your concern and agree that consumers should be able to
freely use the internet .
We should all be able to decide to which service we wish to subscribe,
in line with our own preferences and with respect to the type of service
and content we want to access. Unfortunately, there has been a lot of
negative and misleading publicity about this proposal. You may have
been misled about the proposed changes to the EU communications
framework laws. The reforms are intended to open up choice and
competition, not restrict it. Existing national laws across the EU
already allow operators to provide differentiated services,
accommodating the diverse needs and desires of consumers across the
market place.
The purpose of this review is to increase consumer protection, by
strengthening operators' obligations to be transparent and provide
information on contract conditions, including any limitations or
restrictions which may apply to the services in question. In order for
competition to operate effectively in the consumer interest, consumers
need to be fully informed of the terms on which services are provided.
They should also be free to switch providers easily and at no additional
cost.
The European Parliament is also increasing the enforcement powers of
national regulators, empowering them to impose minimum quality of
service requirements on all operators and enabling them to take action
against operators who are in breach of regulatory obligations.
These quality obligations would ensure that operators are not able to
degrade, throttle and block applications, content or services in ways
which are anticompetitive.
The current legislative framework has worked well in driving the
development of internet services and promoting competition and
innovation. This has had a positive impact on European competitiveness
to the benefit of European citizens. These major improvements to the
rules will provide incentives for investment in new broadband and
wireless services.
The vote in Committee took place on 21 April, although no agreement was
reached on amendment 138. The talks continue between the European
Parliament and Commission and Council in an attempt to find a suitable
compromise. My colleague, Malcolm Harbour MEP, is involved in these
discussions. Any resulting agreement will be put before the European
Parliament for approval on May 6.
Conservative MEPs in the European Parliament are committed to strong and
active consumer protection in an open and competitive market. We will
strive to ensure that your rights to access a wide range of content and
services over the internet continue to be safeguarded.
Please do not hesitate to contact us again if you have any questions or
comments.
Yours sincerely,
John Purvis
Member of the European Parliament for Scotland
Edited to add...
A full ten days later a reply arrived from one of my labour MEP's in which she points out that I have clearly misunderstood the situation and that in between croissant breaks both she and her un-contactable colleague are working hard on my behalf.
Dear (sandbender),
Thank you for your recent correspondence raising your concerns about the
Telecoms legislation. Please accept this response on behalf of myself and my
colleague David Martin MEP.
Thank you for contacting me about the European Parliament's vote on the
telecoms package. The European Parliament adopted its second reading on the
proposals that constitute the package on 6 May and I am writing to update
you on the position taken by myself and my Labour colleagues.
We worked hard to achieve an overall package that delivers real benefits for
consumers by opening up competition in the telecoms market while
strengthening consumers' rights and the protection of their privacy.
We listened carefully to citizens' concerns about the protection of their
fundamental rights in the on-line environment. The internet is an important
tool for education, civil society and freedom of speech and that needs to be
fostered and protected. MEPs therefore inserted amendments making clear that
all laws affecting the internet must respect the fundamental rights of
citizens.
We also sought to maintain a quality service by explicitly allowing
technical measures to manage traffic - for example, giving priority to voice
or video communication data, which would be degraded by a 0.5 second delay,
over e-mail data where a 0.5 second delay would not affect the quality of
the service. At the same time we have made it clear that such technical
management should not be abused to give unfair access to some services over
others. That is why we have also given explicit powers to regulators, for
the first time in EU law, to intervene against a carrier that unfairly
discriminates against a particular service provider.
The position adopted by the Parliament maintains the important benefits of
this legislation that Labour MEPs have campaigned for and put forward in
amendments made at first reading, from limits on contract length to prevent
consumers being 'locked in' to a bad deal, to same day number porting for
mobile phone services and as a priority for me and my Labour colleagues, the
guaranteeing of equal access to communication services for disabled people.
The final proposal adopted by the European Parliament also adopted Labour
amendments that will ensure the 116 000 missing child hotline - a crucial
plank in developing an EU rapid child abduction alert - will be set up in
every European Union member state.
The draft laws that make up the package now pass to the Council of Ministers
to consider. Labour Euro MPs will continue to call for the benefits outlined
above to be included in the final legislation.
However, outstanding differences from the various perspectives will have to
be debated between the European Parliament and the European Council
following the European Elections in June 2009.
Thank you once again for contacting me about this important issue.
Yours sincerely,
Catherine Stihler, MEP for Scotland
Edited to add...
Many weeks later a reply arrived from the liberal MEP Elspeth Attwooll
Dear (sandbender),
 
Thank you very much for contacting me about internet issues in the revised EU telecoms directives.
 
The ALDE group in the European Parliament, to which the UK Liberal Democrats belong, has been in the forefront of pushing for liberal solutions for consumers in the package of telecoms legislation which was voted on May 6th. This package revises current EU legislation on the regulation of electronic communications and covers mobile and fixed telephones, broadcasting and the internet. It will in general enhance competition and ensure that all market players have sufficient incentives to invest in infrastructure and services for consumers, while strengthening the rights of users.
 
The key directives which were being revised were directive 2002/22/EC on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services; directive 2002/58/EC concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (both covered in the Harbour report); and directive 2002/21/EC on universal service and users' rights relating to electronic communications networks (dealt with in the Trautmann report).
 
The ALDE group has been consistently vigilant on the issue of protecting the fundamental rights of internet users and championing consumer protection. The internet plays an important role within society, both socially and economically and is now a crucial building block for a democratic society, providing a space for communication, access to information, for technological development and for economic activity. Everyone should have equal rights to access and distribute content. The ALDE group have pushed throughout the passage of this legislation for measures which protect our freedom to use the internet.   
 
The controversial aspects of the present review concern in particular a) universal service and 'net neutrality', and b) the avoidance of internet 'content filtering' or users being cut off or having access blocked, for example for copyright infringement without due process and fair procedures:
 
a) On 'net neutrality' the ALDE group accepted that traffic management is legitimate and necessary to avoid network congestion or slowing down of traffic over networks and thus maintain a good quality of service for consumers. But we insisted in discussions that it should only be for this purpose, and that such measures should be non discriminatory and not distort competition – i.e. no ISP should get away with degrading the traffic of Google for commercial reasons because it has a partnership with Yahoo. We were influential in achieving wording which specifies that end-users should be informed of any traffic management measures taken by the Internet Service Provider and how they would impact the quality of service. National Regulatory Authorities must set out minimum quality of service requirements on ISPs.
 
b) On 'content filtering', ALDE backed wording which stipulates that any measures regarding users' access to and/or use of services and applications must respect the fundamental rights of citizens, including in relation to privacy and due process, and any such measures should take full account of policy goals adopted at Community level, such as furthering the development of the Community information society. We also secured the outlawing of systematic surveillance of internet usage in the context of cooperation over lawfulness of content.
 
Then our votes ensured that the industry committee backed a text whereby no restrictions would be imposed on the freedom of internet users without a prior court order. Despite France, with apparently some UK government backing, championing the 'three-strikes and you're out' rule, the European Parliament secured in tough negotiations with the Council of Ministers representing the 27 EU governments the following text which was tabled as amendment 10 for plenary:
 
'Measures taken regarding end-users' access to or use of services and applications through electronic communications networks shall respect the fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons, including in relation to privacy, freedom of expression and access to information and the right to a judgment by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law and acting in respect of due process in accordance with Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.'
 
The ALDE group believed although am 10 is far better than the Council was originally willing to concede, the original committee wording was in fact better, in particular by insisting on a prior court ruling, and we thus retabled it as a plenary amendment (am 5 plenary, some people will know it as am 138 at committee stage):
 
'applying the principle that no restriction may be imposed on the fundamental rights and freedoms of end-users, without a prior ruling by the judicial authorities, notably in accordance with Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union on freedom of expression and information, save when public security is threatened in which case the ruling may be subsequent'
 
Liberal Democrats have therefore worked long and hard to ensure a fair outcome to these legislative negotiations, such that users will be protected from unfair or illegal restrictions on internet access
Yours sincerely,
Elspeth Attwooll MEP
So the short version 'IMHO' with regard to this issue...
SNP/LIberal's = Good
Labour/Conservative = Bad.
Thanks for looking
