Voting List Net Neutrality Telecom Regulation 1st Plenary

April 1st, 2014: Here are the voting recommendations of civil society organizations on the amendments related to Net Neutrality tabled for the Plenary vote in first reading by the EU Parliament. You can find a detailed brief in defense of the "Open Internet Amendments" tabled by a cross-party coalition.

Update April third: Most important amendments were adopted by EU Parliament in first reading!

Recital 45

Amendment 41 - rejected - win

Amendment 41 ITRE -
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an open platform for innovation with low access barriers for end-users, content and application providers and internet service providers. The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer perspective, showed that a significant number of end-users are affected by traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications. These tendencies require clear rules at the Union level to maintain the open internet and to avoid fragmentation of the single market resulting from individual Member States' measures.	(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an open platform for innovation with low access barriers for users, content and application providers and internet service providers. The principle of "net neutrality" in the open internet means that traffic should be treated equally, without discrimination, restriction or interference, independent of the sender, receiver, type, content, device, service or application. As stated by the European Parliament resolution of 17 November 2011 on the open internet and net neutrality in Europe 2011/2866, the internet's open character has been a key driver of competitiveness, economic growth, social development and innovation – which has led to spectacular levels of development in online applications, content and services – and thus of growth in the offer of, and demand for, content and services, and has made it a vitally important accelerator in the free circulation of knowledge, ideas and information, including in countries where access to independent media is limited. The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of users to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer perspective, showed that a significant number of users are affected by traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications. These tendencies require clear rules at the Union level to maintain the open internet and to avoid fragmentation of the single market resulting from individual Member States' measures.

Amendment 237 +

Amendment 237 S&D, Verts/ALE & GUE/NGL +
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an open platform for innovation with low access barriers for end-users, content and application providers and internet service providers. The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer perspective, showed that a significant number of end-users are affected by traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications. These tendencies require clear rules at the Union level to maintain the open internet and to avoid fragmentation of the single market resulting from individual Member States' measures.	(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an open platform for innovation with low access barriers for end-users, content and application providers and internet service providers. The principle of "net neutrality" means that traffic should be treated equally, without discrimination, restriction or interference, independent of the sender, receiver, type, content, device, service or application. As stated by the European Parliament resolution of 17 November 2011 on the open internet and net neutrality in Europe 2011/2866, the internet's open character has been a key driver of competitiveness, economic growth, social development and innovation – which has led to spectacular levels of development in online applications, content and services – and thus of growth in the offer of, and demand for, content and services, and has made it a vitally important accelerator in the free circulation of knowledge, ideas and information, including in countries where access to independent media is limited. The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer perspective, showed that a significant number of end-users are affected by traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications. These tendencies require clear rules at the Union level to maintain the open internet and to avoid fragmentation of the single market resulting from individual Member States' measures.

Recital 49

Amendment 46 - adopted - lost

Amendment 46 ITRE -
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(49) There is also end-user demand for services and applications requiring an enhanced level of assured service quality offered by providers of electronic communications to the public or by content, applications or service providers. Such services may comprise inter alia broadcasting via Internet Protocol (IP-TV), video-conferencing and certain health applications. End-users should therefore also be free to conclude agreements on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service with either providers of electronic communications to the public or providers of content, applications or services.	(49) It should be possible to meet user demand for services and applications requiring an enhanced level of assured service quality. Such services may comprise inter alia broadcasting, video-conferencing and certain health applications. Users should therefore also be free to conclude agreements on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service with either providers of internet access services, providers of electronic communications to the public or providers of content, applications or services. Where such agreements are concluded with the provider of internet access, that provider should ensure that the enhanced quality service does not cause material detriment to the general quality of internet access. Furthermore, traffic management measures should not be applied in such a way as to discriminate between competing services.

Amendment 238 +

Amendment 238 S&D, Verts/ALE & GUE/NGL +
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(49) There is also end-user demand for services and applications requiring an enhanced level of assured service quality offered by providers of electronic communications to the public or by content, applications or service providers. Such services may comprise inter alia broadcasting via Internet Protocol (IP-TV), video-conferencing and certain health applications. End-users should therefore also be free to conclude agreements on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service with either providers of electronic communications to the public or providers of content, applications or services.	(49) It should be possible to meet end-user demand for services and applications requiring an enhanced or assured service quality. Such services may comprise inter alia broadcasting, video-conferencing and certain health applications. End-users should therefore also be free to conclude agreements on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service with either providers of internet access services, providers of electronic communications to the public or providers of content, applications or services. Where such agreements are concluded with the provider of internet access, that provider should ensure that the enhanced quality service does not cause detriment to the quality of internet access. Furthermore, traffic management measures should not discriminate between competing services and applications.

Recital 50

Amendment 47 -

Amendment 47 ITRE -
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time-sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications to the public is necessary for the provision of specialised services and is expected to play an important role in the development of new services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. At the same time such arrangements should allow providers of electronic communications to the public to better balance traffic and prevent network congestion. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public should therefore be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such agreements do not substantially impair the general quality of internet access services.	(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time-sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications may also be necessary for the provision of certain services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications should therefore continue to be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such agreements do not impair the general quality of internet access services.

Amendment 239 + passed

Amendment 239 S&D, Verts/ALE & GUE/NGL +
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time-sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications to the public is necessary for the provision of specialised services and is expected to play an important role in the development of new services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. At the same time such arrangements should allow providers of electronic communications to the public to better balance traffic and prevent network congestion. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public should therefore be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such agreements do not substantially impair the general quality of internet access services.	(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time-sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications may also be necessary for the provision of certain services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications should therefore continue to be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such agreements do not impair the quality of internet access service.

Recital 51

Amendment 48 -

Amendment 48 ITRE -
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(51) National regulatory authorities play an essential role in ensuring that end-users are effectively able to exercise this freedom to avail of open internet access. To this end national regulatory authorities should have monitoring and reporting obligations, and ensure compliance of providers of electronic communications to the public and the availability of non-discriminatory internet access services of high quality which are not impaired by specialised services. In their assessment of a possible general impairment of internet access services, national regulatory authorities should take account of quality parameters such as timing and reliability parameters (latency, jitter, packet loss), levels and effects of congestion in the network, actual versus advertised speeds, performance of internet access services compared with specialised services, and quality as perceived by end-users. National regulatory authorities should be empowered to impose minimum quality of service requirements on all or individual providers of electronic communications to the public if this is necessary to prevent general impairment/degradation of the quality of service of internet access services.	(51) National regulatory authorities play an essential role in ensuring that users are effectively able to exercise this freedom to avail of open internet access. To this end national regulatory authorities should have monitoring and reporting obligations, and ensure compliance of providers of internet access services, other providers of electronic communications and other service providers and the availability of non-discriminatory internet access services of high quality which are not impaired by specialised services. In their assessment of a possible general impairment of internet access services, national regulatory authorities should take account of quality parameters such as timing and reliability parameters (latency, jitter, packet loss), levels and effects of congestion in the network, actual versus advertised speeds, performance of internet access services compared with enhanced quality services, and quality as perceived by users. National regulatory authorities should establish complaint procedures providing effective, simple and readily available redress mechanisms for users and be empowered to impose minimum quality of service requirements on all or individual providers of internet access services, other providers of electronic communications and other service providers if this is necessary to prevent general impairment/degradation of the quality of service of internet access services.

Amendment 240 + passed

Amendment 240 S&D, Verts/ALE & GUE/NGL +
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(51) National regulatory authorities play an essential role in ensuring that end-users are effectively able to exercise this freedom to avail of open internet access. To this end national regulatory authorities should have monitoring and reporting obligations, and ensure compliance of providers of electronic communications to the public and the availability of non-discriminatory internet access services of high quality which are not impaired by specialised services. In their assessment of a possible general impairment of internet access services, national regulatory authorities should take account of quality parameters such as timing and reliability parameters (latency, jitter, packet loss), levels and effects of congestion in the network, actual versus advertised speeds, performance of internet access services compared with specialised services, and quality as perceived by end-users. National regulatory authorities should be empowered to impose minimum quality of service requirements on all or individual providers of electronic communications to the public if this is necessary to prevent general impairment/degradation of the quality of service of internet access services.	(51) National regulatory authorities play an essential role in ensuring that end-users are effectively able to exercise this freedom to avail of open internet access. To this end national regulatory authorities should have monitoring and reporting obligations, and ensure compliance of providers of internet access services, other providers of electronic communications and other service providers and the availability of non-discriminatory internet access services of high quality which are not impaired by specialised services. In their assessment of a possible general impairment of internet access services, national regulatory authorities should take account of quality parameters such as timing and reliability parameters (latency, jitter, packet loss), levels and effects of congestion in the network, actual versus advertised speeds, performance of internet access services compared with enhanced quality services, and quality as perceived by end-users. National regulatory authorities should establish complaint procedures providing effective, simple and readily available redress mechanisms for end users and be empowered to impose minimum quality of service requirements on all or individual providers of internet access services, other providers of electronic communications and other service providers if this is necessary to prevent impairment/degradation of the quality of service of internet access services.

Article 2.2

Amendment 241 ++ passed

Amendment 241 S&D, Verts/ALE & GUE/NGL ++
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(12a) "net neutrality" means the principle that all internet traffic is treated equally, without discrimination, restriction or interference, independent of its sender, receiver, type, content, device, service or application;

Amendment 234 ++ passed

Amendment 234 ALDE ++
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	12a. "net neutrality" means the principle according to which all internet traffic is treated equally, without discrimination, restriction or interference, independently of its sender, recipient, type, content, device, service or application;

Amendment 99 -

Amendment 99 ITRE -
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(14) ‘internet access service’ means a publicly available electronic communications service that provides connectivity to the internet, and thereby connectivity between virtually all end points connected to the internet, irrespective of the network technology used;	(14) "internet access service" means a publicly available electronic communications service that provides connectivity to the internet, and thereby connectivity between virtually all end points of the internet, irrespective of the network technologies or terminal equipment used;

Amendment 100 -

Amendment 100 ITRE -
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(15) ‘specialised service’ means an electronic communications service or any other service that provides the capability to access specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, and whose technical characteristics are controlled from end-to-end or provides the capability to send or receive data to or from a determined number of parties or endpoints; and that is not marketed or widely used as a substitute for internet access service;	(15) 'specialised service' means an electronic communications service optimised for specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, provided over logically distinct capacity and relying on strict admission control with a view to ensuring enhanced quality from end to end and that is not marketed or usable as a substitute for internet access service;

Amendment 242 ++ passed

Amendment 235 ALDE Amendment 242 S&D, Verts/ALE & GUE/NGL ++
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(14) ‘internet access service’ means a publicly available electronic communications service that provides connectivity to the internet, and thereby connectivity between virtually all end points connected to the internet, irrespective of the network technology used;	(14) "internet access service" means a publicly available electronic communications service that provides connectivity to the internet in accordance with the principle of net neutrality, and thereby connectivity between virtually all end points of the internet, irrespective of the network technologies or terminal equipment used;
(15) ‘specialised service’ means an electronic communications service or any other service that provides the capability to access specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, and whose technical characteristics are controlled from end-to-end or provides the capability to send or receive data to or fromea dtermined number of parties or endpoints; and that is not marketed or widely used as a substitute for internet access service;	(15) "specialised service" means an electronic communications service optimised for specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, provided over logically distinct capacity, relying on strict admission control, offering functionality requiring enhanced quality from end to end and that is not marketed or usable as a substitute for internet access service;

Article 23

Amendment 148 - passed

Amendment 148 ITRE -
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Freedom to provide and avail of open internet access, and reasonable traffic management	Freedom to provide and avail of open internet access, and traffic management

Amendment 149 -

Amendment 149 ITRE -
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. End-users shall be free to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services of their choice via their internet access service.	1. Users shall be free to access and distribute information and content, run and provide applications and services and use terminals of their choice, irrespective of the user's or provider's location or the location, origin or destination of the service, information or content, via their internet access service.
End-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds with providers of internet access services and, in accordance with any such agreements relative to data volumes, to avail of any offers by providers of internet content, applications and services.

Amendment 150 -

Amendment 150 ITRE -
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. End-users shall also be free to agree with either providers of electronic communications to the public or with providers of content, applications and services on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service.	2. Providers of internet access, of electronic communications to the public and providers of content, applications and services shall be free to offer specialised services to users. Such services shall only be offered if the network capacity is sufficient to provide them in addition to internet access services and they are not to the material detriment of the availability or quality of internet access services. Providers of internet access to users shall not discriminate between such services.
In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity in order to enable the provision of specialised services. The provision of specialised services shall not impair in a recurring or continuous manner the general quality of internet access services.

Amendment 151 -

Amendment 151 ITRE -
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. The exercise of the freedoms provided for in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be facilitated by the provision of complete information in accordance with Article 25(1), Article 26 (2), and Article 27 (1) and (2).	4. Users shall be provided with complete information in accordance with Article 20(2), Article 21(3) and Article 21a of Directive 2002/22/EC, including information on any traffic management measures applied that might affect access to and distribution of information, content, applications and services as specified in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article.

Amendment 152 -

Amendment 152 ITRE -
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:	5. Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, altering or degrading specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply traffic management measures. Traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:
a) implement a legislative provision or a court order, or prevent or impede serious crimes;	a) implement a court order;
b) preserve the integrity and security of the network, services provided via this network, and the end-users' terminals;	b) preserve the integrity and security of the network, services provided via this network, and the end-users' terminals;
c) prevent the transmission of unsolicited communications to end-users who have given their prior consent to such restrictive measures;
d) minimise the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.	d) prevent or mitigate the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.
Reasonable traffic management shall only entail processing of data that is necessary and proportionate to achieve the purposes set out in this paragraph.	Traffic management measures shall not be maintained longer than necessary. Without prejudice to Directive 95/46, traffic management measures shall only entail such processing of personal data that is necessary and proportionate to achieve the purposes set out in this paragraph, and shall also be subject to Directive 2002/58, in particular with respect to confidentiality of communications. Providers of internet access services shall put in place appropriate, clear, open and efficient procedures aimed at addressing complaints alleging breaches of this Article. Such procedures shall be without prejudice to the users right to refer the matter to the national regulatory authority.

Amendment 243 ++ passed

Amendment 236 ALDE Amendment 243 S&D, Verts/ALE & GUE/NGL ++
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Freedom to provide and avail of open internet access, and reasonable traffic management	Freedom to provide and avail of open internet access, and reasonable traffic management
1. End-users shall be free to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services of their choice via their internet access service.	1. End-users shall have the right to access and distribute information and content, run and provide applications and services and use terminals of their choice, irrespective of the end-user's or provider's location or the location, origin or destination of the service, information or content, via their internet access service.
End-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds with providers of internet access services and, in accordance with any such agreements relative to data volumes, to avail of any offers by providers of internet content, applications and services.
2. End-users shall also be free to agree with either providers of electronic communications to the public or with providers of content, applications and services on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service.	2. Providers of internet access, of electronic communications to the public and providers of content, applications and services shall be free to offer specialised services to end-users. Such services shall only be offered if the network capacity is sufficient to provide them in addition to internet access services and they are not to the detriment of the availability or quality of internet access services. Providers of internet access to end-users shall not discriminate between functionally equivalent services or applications.
In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity. The provision of specialised services shall not impair in a recurring or continuous manner the general quality of internet access services.
3. This Article is without prejudice to Union or national legislation related to the lawfulness of the information, content, application or services transmitted.
4. The exercise of the freedoms provided for in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be facilitated by the provision of complete information in accordance with Article 25(1), Article 26 (2), and Article 27 (1) and (2).	4. End-users shall be provided with complete information in accordance with Article 20(2), Article 21(3) and Article 21a of Directive 2002/22/EC, including information on any traffic management measures applied that might affect access to and distribution of information, content, applications and services as specified in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article.
5. Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:	5. Providers of internet access services and end-users may agree to set limits on data volumes or speeds for internet access services. Providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, altering, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply traffic management measures. Traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:
a) implement a legislative provision or a court order, or prevent or impede serious crimes;	a) implement a court order;
b) preserve the integrity and security of the network, services provided via this network, and the end-users' terminals;	b) preserve the integrity and security of the network, services provided via this network, and the end-users' terminals;
c) prevent the transmission of unsolicited communications to end-users who have given their prior consent to such restrictive measures;
d) minimise the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.	d) prevent or mitigate the effects of temporary and exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally
Reasonable traffic management shall only entail processing of data that is necessary and proportionate to achieve the purposes set out in this paragraph.	Traffic management measures shall not be maintained longer than necessary.
Without prejudice to Directive 95/46/EC, traffic management measures shall only entail such processing of personal data that is necessary and proportionate to achieve the purposes set out in this paragraph, and shall also be subject to Directive 2002/58/EC, in particular with respect to confidentiality of communications.	Providers of internet access services shall put in place appropriate, clear, open and efficient procedures aimed at addressing complaints alleging breaches of this Article. Such procedures shall be without prejudice to the end-users right to refer the matter to the national regulatory authority.

Article 24

Amendment 153 - passed

Amendment 153 ITRE -
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.	1. In exercising their powers under Article 30a with respect to Article 23, national regulatory authorities shall closely monitor compliance with Article 23(5) and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall publish reports on an annual basis regarding their monitoring and findings, and provide those reports to the Commission and BEREC.

Amendment 154 - passed

Amendment 154 ITRE -
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. In order to prevent the general impairment of quality of service for internet access services or to safeguard the ability of end-users to access and distribute content or information or to run applications and services of their choice, national regulatory authorities shall have the power to impose minimum quality of service requirements on providers of electronic communications to the public.	2. In order to prevent the general impairment of quality of service for internet access services or to safeguard the ability of users to access and distribute content or information or to run applications, services and software of their choice, national regulatory authorities shall have the power to impose minimum quality of service requirements, and where appropriate, other quality of service parameters, as defined by the national regulatory authorities on providers of electronic communications to the public.
National regulatory authorities shall, in good time before imposing any such requirements, provide the Commission with a summary of the grounds for action, the envisaged requirements and the proposed course of action. This information shall also be made available to BEREC. The Commission may, having examined such information, make comments or recommendations thereupon, in particular to ensure that the envisaged requirements do not adversely affect the functioning of the internal market. The envisaged requirements shall not be adopted during a period of two months from the receipt of complete information by the Commission unless otherwise agreed between the Commission and the national regulatory authority, or the Commission has informed the national regulatory authority of a shortened examination period, or the Commission has made comments or recommendations. National regulatory authorities shall take the utmost account of the Commission’s comments or recommendations and shall communicate the adopted requirements to the Commission and BEREC.	National regulatory authorities shall, in good time before imposing any such requirements, provide the Commission with a summary of the grounds for action, the envisaged requirements and the proposed course of action. This information shall also be made available to BEREC. The Commission may, having examined such information, make comments or recommendations thereupon, in particular to ensure that the envisaged requirements do not adversely affect the functioning of the internal market. National regulatory authorities shall take the utmost account of the Commission’s comments or recommendations and shall communicate the adopted requirements to the Commission and BEREC.

Amendment 155 - passed

Amendment 155 ITRE -
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. The Commission may adopt implementing acts defining uniform conditions for the implementation of the obligations of national competent authorities under this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33 (2).	3. Within six months of adoption of this regulation, BEREC shall, after consulting stakeholders and in close cooperation with the Commission, lay down general guidelines defining uniform conditions for the implementation of the obligations of national competent authorities under this Article, including with respect to the application of traffic management measures and for monitoring of compliance.

Amendment 244 ++

Amendment 244 S&D, Verts/ALE & GUE/NGL ++
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Safeguards for quality of service	Safeguards for quality of service
1. National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23(1) and (2), compliance with Article 23(5), and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.	1. In exercising their powers under Article 30a with respect to Article 23, national regulatory authorities shall closely monitor compliance with Article 23(5) and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall publish reports on an annual basis regarding their monitoring and findings, and provide those reports to the Commission and BEREC.
2. In order to prevent the general impairment of quality of service for internet access services or to safeguard the ability of end-users to access and distribute content or information or to run applications and services of their choice, national regulatory authorities shall have the power to impose minimum quality of service requirements on providers of electronic communications to the public.	In order to prevent the impairment of quality of service for internet access services or to safeguard the ability of end-users to access and distribute content or information or to run applications , services and software of their choice, national regulatory authorities shall have the power to impose minimum quality of service requirements, and where appropriate, other quality of service parameters, as defined by the national regulatory authorities, on providers of electronic communications to the public.
National regulatory authorities shall, in good time before imposing any such requirements, provide the Commission with a summary of the grounds for action, the envisaged requirements and the proposed course of action. This information shall also be made available to BEREC. The Commission may, having examined such information, make comments or recommendations thereupon, in particular to ensure that the envisaged requirements do not adversely affect the functioning of the internal market. The envisaged requirements shall not be adopted during a period of two months from the receipt of complete information by the Commission unless otherwise agreed between the Commission and the national regulatory authority, or the Commission has informed the national regulatory authority of a shortened examination period, or the Commission has made comments or recommendations. National regulatory authorities shall take the utmost account of the Commission's comments or recommendations and shall communicate the adopted requirements to the Commission and BEREC.	National regulatory authorities shall, in good time before imposing any such requirements, provide the Commission with a summary of the grounds for action, the envisaged requirements and the proposed course of action. This information shall also be made available to BEREC. The Commission may, having examined such information, make comments or recommendations thereupon, in particular to ensure that the envisaged requirements do not adversely affect the functioning of the internal market. The envisaged requirements shall not be adopted during a period of two months from the receipt of complete information by the Commission unless otherwise agreed between the Commission and the national regulatory authority, or the Commission has informed the national regulatory authority ofha sortened examination period, or the Commission has made comments or recommendations. National regulatory authorities shall take the utmost account of the Commission's comments or recommendations and shall communicate the adopted requirements to the Commission and BEREC.
3. The Commission may adopt implementing acts defining uniform conditions for the implementation of the obligations of national competent authorities under this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2).	3. Within six months of adoption of this Regulation, BEREC shall, after consulting stakeholders and in close cooperation with the Commission, lay down general guidelines defining uniform conditions for the implementation of the obligations of national competent authorities under this Article , including with respect to the application of traffic management measures and for monitoring of compliance.