Details view: GLII

GLII – Greece Protagoniste1 #138067 Going Local 2011, Athens, 21/11/2011
The event: Presented the DAE and the progress made in the time since the last GL Discussed progress in the area of Broadband; Presented the new financing instruments – CEF; Introduced the concept of Smart Specialisation Strategies; Listened to the barriers identified by the regions concerning better use of available funds. The participants to the meeting were "by invitation only". DGs INFSO and REGIO presented an overview of the DAE with specific references to Broadband deployment in Greece as well as the relevant cohesion instruments and the Connecting Europe Facility. The meeting continued with the presentation of the Greek situation which can be summarised as follows: BB coverage in Greece is around 19.9% (almost 100% urban and 60% rural). 71% of BB are bundled services; There has been a price decrease in BB connections; The Special Secretary for Digital Greece indicated that they have given a contract in order to start the necessary work. There are some legal issues such as passage rights and home installations; The EC needs to move fast by ensuring revolving funds, equity and loans in order to use all financial instruments available; The strategy to be applied in order to reach DAE goals would include modern and affordable services to the users, competitiveness and log term goals for penetration; Concerning on going projects: FTHH – awaiting first deliverables of a study with proposed scenarios for implementation, financial means, and analytical business plan. There are plans for consultation with the main public and private actors (including services providers and manufacturers of active and passive equipment). It is expected that in the next two months the project will be in the implementation phase but they are still waiting some feedback from DG COM. The project will be amortised in 10 years which is not acceptable (best scenario 12-13 years). Two questions to be answered: How can this network be joined to MAN and usage of Cu or fibre. MAN – 1300 km in 72 Greek cities which are not active but can be used as infrastructure for FTHH. The relevant documentation was submitted to DG COMP for approval. MAN will help to bring the amortisation of the FTHH project under 10 years. The proposal will be finalised in around one and a half month's time. A bigger investment (presently 75 bn) might be needed. Rural – Very near tendering a project based on the model of MAN. The first phase finishes in 3 years giving access of more than 30 Mbps to 100% of households. The project will be submitted to DG REGIO before tendering. SYZEFXIS II – is a service providing project in contrast to the three previous ones which are infrastructure projects. This would make big savings in public communications. It is a 650k programme out of which 170k comes from Digital Convergence and perhaps the rest will be paid by the Greek State. The discussions on Digital Greece concluded the following: There is an absolute need for a clear strategy for telecommunications which will answer the questions on what is going to happen, when and how are the infrastructures to be changed and used; It has been suggested to set up a task force including academics, the state and market representatives in order to look at the regulatory framework, look on how to modernise infrastructures, speed up activities and look at harmonising legal issues to the application of European Law. A Position Paper was sent to the participants before the meeting and this and the presentations of the Greek State representative were the basis of the discussion which followed. The main points of the discussion could be summarised as follows: It is important to move immediately and start operations on SYZEFSIS II. MAN needs to be given to SYZEFKSIS. Greece should ask for priority in project bonds by presenting integrated projects and by showing that they know how to do it; Private investment needs to be obtained; Synergies need to be created and a strict timetable must be kept; The present situation makes investment very difficult as there is no money in the banks; Need to make sure that public administration which has other problems should commence to work properly; Investment is hampered by high taxation rate (48% tax to the users – other countries no more than the VAT); Need for specific proposals to gradually the taxation of mobile telephony in order to keep going the only part of the Greek economy which is at present growing; Planning permissions need to be obtained by different authorities which creates delays: Insecurity about long term environment concerning digital spectrum; Mobile BB in Greece is 24% but there are problems concerning speed; There are problems with the strategic selection of policy concerning fixed telephony as this makes the State owner of all infrastructures. Thus, the State becomes the main competitor – deregulation should remain; Public procurement processes (such as appeals) are time consuming and can create delays up to 9 years! Processes need to be simplified. Athens, 21/11/2011 – evening session with regional representatives After presenting the DAE, CEF and DG REGIO financial instruments, there was a questions and answers session. These can be summarised as follows: The fact that the funds went to the state and not to the regions does not allow them to plan, implement and complete different projects; Decisions about the regions are taken at central government and the decision makers do not know the needs and problems of the regions; Regional representatives are now elected and should be allowed to plan for their region. The Spanish model is an interesting one to follow; The regions have different programmes for training and promoting digital literacy. Ioannina, 22/11/2011 After presenting the DAE, CEF and DG REGIO financial instruments, there were a number of presentations from the region. The main points are as follows: In a period of crisis it is important to invest in small companies which can have an important multiplier effect; Infrastructure remains with the State although the State accepts that it is the responsibility of the region and more specifically the municipality to take care of the different projects. This means that the municipalities have increased responsibilities without having the relevant financing; The relationship between the financial and telecoms operators and service providers is now settle and as all these are closely related there might be conflict of interest, carters and monopolies. There might be conflicts of interest as they are always the same companies closely related to the state; There are grey areas in the money flow; There is lack of regulation. Regulation needs to separate the different layers both in Greece and in Europe. The goal is not only to spend the money but to spend it wisely; Local companies are at present excluded. Planning for projects should be in parallel between the public and private sector. The competition procedures should be clear and transparent; SYZWFKIS is too low so it is difficult to have too many users simultaneously and need to prioritise. Internally it is BB but the external connections are not so there are bottlenecks; SYZEFKSIS has not investigated in depth all networks; The MAN networks are used only at 40% of their capacity i.e. only by those who have something to do with the municipality. The network is not serviced; Concerning MAN and SYZEFKSIS, the legal framework is not clear. Big municipalities like Ioannina can bypass problems but this is not possible for the smaller ones; There are serious problems with lack of applications. MAN therefore is not used to its full capacity. Technically it is easy to do so but the problem is at the level of political decisions which need to be made either before the project starts or during its implementation phase so that everything is in place when it finishes. There is a lack of valorisation policies and this is the main reason that the networks do not function.= Athens, 28/11/2011 – Smart Specialisation Strategies Conference The Commission presented the DAE, CEF, financing instruments and Smart Specialisation Strategies. Members of the Smart Specialisation Strategies Platform Mirror Group presented best practices and tactics in preparing a SSS. The points raised by the participants were: Trans-border cooperation such as in the Limburg Province is not easy to implement in a country like Greece due to its geographical specificities; Consumer spending in Greece is decreasing sharply as are incomes. Visibility of BB is a minor consideration for the Greek citizen; It is important to use all available funds but in a structured and well thought manner. The end users should be asked; Regions should be given the possibility to plan for themselves. Direct allocation of funds to the regions is important; Regions are trying to get organised in cooperation with local universities in order to identify competitive advantage areas. Best practices in Greece were presented and in particular one of the smart cities – eTrikala. Heraklion, 29/12/2012 – Smart Specialisation Strategies The Commission presented the DAE, financing instruments and the concept of SSS. The regional presented their digital regional activities. The Digital Crete Activity follows closely the actions of the DAE at a local level. A discussion followed about implemented projects, future plans and existing problems. There are a number of small actions which are immediately implemented but need to somehow be connected to future political decisions; The selection of the different actions was based on the specifications given to the regions; The top-down approach followed in financing regional policy does not take into account the specific needs of the regions; Any regional strategy needs to be based on social agreement and then should be adapted to the European financing mechanisms; Any regional strategy should be competitive, sustainable, based on research and innovation and ensure a better quality of life for the inhabitants of the region. Athens, 5/12/2011 – Digital Trends Conference The Commission presented the DAE, CC and Green ICT possibilities of financing, planned CC strategy. (Pillar 5 and actions 70, 71, 73 in Pillar 7).

Enter task details