 Thank you so much, Ray. I'm delighted to be with you for more than one reason. And you are well informed about the very secret meetings within the Commission. And that blood is at the walls and will stay there. We are going on. So having said that and talking about my past, while you are indeed correctly mentioning that not everyone appreciates my decisions at that time, I always say after a while they will accept and not only accept but also appreciate. But, and then I'm coming to this portfolio. I'm delighted to be asked for this portfolio. A complete surprise but that's not interesting for you for I was not of the right political color. By the way, after last night I will get every job that I want but I want to stay. I want to stay here for this is the best you can imagine. And that is really something and you are already mentioning it when we had the cup of coffee grain that this is the instrument in just explaining but not only explaining but implementing what Europe can do to come closer to the driver's seat again. For we were in the driver's seat and we should be closer and if we are just explaining to the outside world, to our citizens that economy has to be recovered, that our jobs have to grow and that our level playing field has to be fair but also fair to the outside world. Having said that, I think that there is an excellent opportunity in just doing it together and that is for me clear cut, clear like crystal so to say. I need you, I need you and I would propose and I sincerely hope that you are in for that so I need a type of budget for it, it's not only you of course not but this portfolio and this issue, it is all about doing it together and are we willing, well we from our side to commission, we are willing and therefore I'm accepting a lot of invitations and a lot of cups of coffee so to say to get your salt, to get the food for salt in our implementation of this digital agenda. We took a risk by the way and especially I took a risk and I pushed my people like hell and they will sometimes say well she is perhaps kind in her personal life but she is a tough one in just pushing everyone. When I took over we were aware that we had to deliver the digital agenda and we had to do it in time and for me in time was just after a couple of months and that was the risk, completely aware of, if you didn't take that decision at that time that it should be quite early in our mandate that we were losing time, time is not on our side and in the meantime chances would be lost and rightly mentioned by you exactly two years ago I spoke about interoperability and I spoke about the standpoint here in Brussels and I'm absolutely sure that some of you were present at that time anyhow you were that way or at least read my remarks and for the others just a very brief review. Interoperability boosts competition and we need more of competition so we need more interoperability. Number two, for devices or applications to be interoperable just to say it in normal language to work together all concerned parties must agree to a common way of doing things and if you are explaining that I can even do it in supermarket when people are asking me what's your new portfolio all about it is doing it in a way that it is together, work together and foremost standards and that is the search point are one way to get that and ladies and gentlemen for more transparency and people sometimes are asking me more transparency is that the way in my opinion in formal standards setting more transparency and public and private procures of technology should be smart and build their systems as much as possible on standards that everybody can use and implement without constraints otherwise it doesn't make sense. That is good for the bottom line because it promotes competition between the suppliers and prevents vendor lock-in and to put it another way as I said at the end of my speech on that occasion choosing open standards is a fairly smart business decision and that speech at that time brought a general perspective to my work on competition policy I'm Dutch and that means in most cases straightforward and sometimes not very diplomatic but you get what you see and what you have so today I must apply that syncing in a more direct way as the person who has proposed the digital agenda for Europe and of course the whole commission is responsible for the digital agenda and again that was a tough fight so to say for this is a horizontal portfolio and it's linked with all the other sectors and portfolios of my colleagues and we love each other to a certain point so to say and so it should be but any implementation and in giving the policy in that field we need to work together and we need the rules of the game so to say so in the implementation I expect interesting parties to mostly turn to me and to demand progress and rightly so so you know me and my people and normally spoken there is coffee therefore let me explain what I have in mind when it comes to the topics of interoperability and standards it is by the way not my intention to raise eyebrows today but I do not apologize if that is the reaction for also body language can be quite clear and can give signal to me and raising eyebrows at my age one doesn't hold back I will start with confession and I'm still a big fan of open standards I have a lot of bad habits but one is in my opinion not that bad and that is I'm consistent and I believe in openness and I believe in practicing what one preaches and that is my line in life how can you expect that people are following you or are backing you or are believing you when you are not doing what you are some observers think open standards is the taint that should not be used in the absence of a generally recognized as if policy document that does not mention open standards would automatically lack merit and I again pragmatic that my position is in between I don't believe that listing or keywords can substitute for policy what ever the labels what matters is the substance and don't buy when someone is trying to get you in that battle of just fighting on words and I would urge all the stakeholders to focus on the content of the package rather than the wrapping and while I'm absolutely certain that this audience is of that type in developing the substantive policy for European standard setting it is important to start with basic questions what is standard? what does a standard look like? and almost always the standard will be embodied in a specification a document that describes and defines the characteristics a device or process or object must have to be an implementation of a given standard and in the case of a formal standard specification is drawn up by standard setting organization pursuant to a well defined process for example the process should be open and transparent and allow for participation why should you do it another way? and participation if of all interested stakeholders and not the least to ensure buy-in and market acceptance for the resulting standards but a standard will be of only limited use for interoperability until many vendors use it as a building block for their product not to mention ladies and gentlemen two competing standards that are both technically excellent excellent for a certain task but differ in the level of constraints for implementing which of those two standards do you think will seem more implementation and use including for unforeseen purposes? the one that you can download from a website and that you can implement without restrictions or the other one which you have to buy which is restricted to certain fields of use and which requires royalty payments for embodied IPRs and the answer is obvious and that is why everybody who cares about interoperability should care about the financial conditions for the use of standards as well as the indirect constraints imposed on certain and on certain parties the fewer constraints the better and in reality there are different degrees of openness between the two extremes that I have sketched out and likewise there is diversity of technical specifications related to interoperability and that range from those embodying formal standards through the free public specifications and up to the priority information to cover all those aspects I have proposed five key actions in the digital agenda for Europe number one have more and better standards recognised and created in Europe number two to make better use of those standards and start to improve interoperability in the absence of standards how to recognise and create more better standards in Europe first we badly need to reform how ICT standards are dealt with in Europe I have advised both internal commission reflection and a wide public consultation have shown that European standardisation framework is out of thing with fast-moving technology markets and in that context I am cooperating with my colleague Vice President Tanjani very closely and by the end of the year the commission will make the necessary proposals for the reform of the European standardisation system and in particular some key reforms will be of special relevance to the ICT sector so wait and see we are aware that you are in a hurry we are in a hurry we are aware that we have to act and we have to deliver the standards that power the digital world are made by the economic actors and in Europe only Etsy allows those actors to directly participate in the making of standards one negative result is that the standard underpinning the emerging universal communication platform the internet and the worldwide web including standards for content formats are made elsewhere and that puts those standards many of which are truly open that's to say they do not come with any constraints for implementers at a disadvantage vis-à-vis European standards when in legislation or public procurement just an example but that's quite dear for you I think we would have been spared some unnecessary fights over the use of document file formats by public bodies in the last few years if there had been a European document format standard already available clear legislation framework is a simple way to bring relevant standards from non-traditional standard setting organizations to an equal footing with European standards when it comes to achieving interoperability and I'm thinking here of bodies like the rules by web consortium Oasis or similar fora and consortium this could be done via a fast track and a fast track approval of their standards through a process hosted by a traditional European standards body and that could be Etsy or through the assessment of those bodies compliant with certain criteria regarding not only openness consensus balance and transparency and second we must use all the opportunities to promote appropriate rules for example disclosure of essential IPR and licensing conditions in standard setting context and believe me I have nothing against IP being brought to the standard setting table but it must be disclosed any economist will tell you that you can only make a directional decision between different options if you can compare and if you can compare the benefits and costs so to say and let's face it a statishing friend the fair, the reasonable and the non-discriminatory prices is a horror task over which reasonable people often disagree and I can assure you we have big discussions on that issue in my last term in office and transparency is there for in everyone's interest and the alternatives are not so why risk the litigation why set the standard in ignorance of the cost for implementation in some cases the joys of the technology and the standard might be obvious in absence of technical alternatives cost and licensing conditions are less relevant in such cases but in most cases let's be honest there are competing options and it makes clear sense to also consider that information the commission has already taken an important step by drafting new guidelines on the application of the treaties and the trust rules to horizontal agreements and you remember that to promote an efficient and competitive standard setting process that is protected against misuse and the draft which is currently available for public comment relies on the well established concepts of non-discrimination transparency and availability and specifies minimum requirements that is standard setting from start so to say but I want to do more some standard setting bodies already have exalted disclosure rules so why give me arguments why not all of them and that is a matter of efficiency in my opinion and surely as a matter of effectiveness when the commission mandates standard bodies to draw up a standard it should have the right to be more demanding on the standardization process to ensure that standards are less demanding when it comes to their adoption that sounds logical, doesn't it? We could also think about enticing other standards body to adopt such rules for example by giving their output preferential treatment when approving them as European standards and finally why not tie the public financing of standards bodies to the existence of good exempted rules let me wrap up this point anyhow by making one thing absolutely clear we want to make standard setting more efficient and not more burdensome take that line home we don't want uniform rules everywhere we want smart rules that are adapted to their respective fields and standard setting for software interoperability is not the same as setting a new standard for say digital television we should have the right rules in the right context and the standardization reform I discussed earlier and the ongoing consultation on the draft guidelines for the horizontal cooperation will initiate a further discussion on exempted disclosure in standard setting organizations and I am absolutely convinced that a more visible role for forehand and for a consortium standardization in Europe will already lead to many improvements here ok, now we have taken care of standards and they should be available but what can we do to ensure they are used in a smart way we want to help ICT procurers to avoid missing opportunities and together with my colleague Nye and with Antonio D'Angi we will draw up detailed guidance on how to analyze the technology prior requirements in order to make the best use of ICT standards in standard specifications by the way that is quite a complex exercise and not only because three of us are involved so three services are involved but it is also current requirements and future developments have to be weighed carefully and I am sure many of you could testify from your own experience that the skills in public authorities very greatly when it comes to the aspect of procurement and many authorities have found themselves unintentionally locked into a preparatory technology for decades and after a certain point that original choice becomes so ingrained of alternatives risk being systematically ignored no matter what the potential benefits could be by the way that is a waste of public money that most public bodies can no longer afford they shouldn't afford at all but nowadays they can't longer afford and it is even worse when decisions result in a waste of private money and that happens where the public authorities decisions force citizens to buy specific products rather than any product compliant with an applicable standard in order to make use of a public service come on, that could be your kids school it is close to all of us insisting on the use of a specific word processor it could be your tax departments online forms requiring a specific word processor and if you have other examples concrete, please, you can share it don't hesitate to send them and that I can use as an argument as you can imagine I want to make sure that guidance will be as practical as possible my other colleague and here I'm showing that it is really making a lot of collegial effort Vice President Zhevkovich and I myself we want to put in place a new European interoperability framework as clear as that and to be sure the existing version of the European interoperability framework is not bad it even sets out a list of characteristics of open standards of cross-border e-government services however our work with member states through the ISA program and its predecessors has made clear that there is an opportunity to further enhance interoperability between public administrations and that second version of the EIF is foreseen to be adopted at the level of the College of Commissioners and will therefore rightly be perceived as a higher status and importance than the EIF version 1 both the framework and an intro what will that new EIF say you will ask while the drafting process has not been easy but that was not what we were looking for easy jobs but I'm convinced that its content provides a pragmatic and an operational set of principles that will help us all to move ahead and for me it is fundamental to have that public administrations spending taxpayers money should opt for the least constraining solution that meets the requirements for a given need as simple as that and such a rule as the default should public authorities from the dangers of long term lock in and it would also ensure ladies and gentlemen competition between suppliers for follow up contracts and services and opting for close solutions would be possible but on the basis of a clear justification rather than because it was the easy option or whatever other reason several member states have comparable policies in place and some of which have actually been inspired by the old EIF for example the comply or explain policy and in my view the commission has a unique opportunity with the adoption of version 2 to reform its lead in this area but what do we do when there is no standard that is a question when there simply is a product everybody has to use in one way or another but there is no specification describing the de facto standards if it implements with my colleagues in the college I will seriously explore all options to ensure that significant market players cannot just choose to deny interoperability with that product you no doubt remember that I have some experience with really distant and high tech companies but it was already touch upon I had to fight hard and I had to fight for several years until Microsoft began to license their missing interoperability information now we are there hopefully complex antitrust investigations followed by full proceedings are perhaps not the only way to increase interoperability there are other ways the commission should not need to run an epic antitrust case every time software lacks interoperability come on let's be serious there are all such problems in one go therefore I am looking for a way to ensure companies offer the required information for licensing we are thinking very hard about how that could be achieved any such initiative would probably be limited to certain types of IT products and I would likely involve some form of pricing constraints whereas in exposed investigations we have all sorts of case specific evidence and economic analyzer for which to base our decisions we are forced to look at more general data and arguments when assessing the impact of example legislation and just to be clear ladies and gentlemen while it is still early days it is certainly possible that I will go for a legislative proposal I am not the one who wants to make only regulations but I am not feeling to do it if it is the only way and that could have a profound impact on the concerned industry so it is not a decision taken lightly that for sure but be aware that that for me is also one of the influential basket and many of you work for a company that could be concerned by such a measure so I invite you here we are buddies to let me have your views and to give me certainty that we can tackle it there are five framework measures we are looking at in order to increase the benefits we can react from interoperability of course interoperability and standards are important concepts across almost all parts of the digital agenda for example we want to achieve interoperability for cross-border e-house applications and for smart energy meters and the benefits of those actions will not only be economic they will also fundamentally shape our future quality of life and will you really be able to put all of that you may ask and I wonder how many times but at the end of the day it's a matter of leadership mentioned by Graham we can't change all of this in one year but my term in office is 5 and there will be plenty who try to stop change and I still want that change and I will keep coming back and speaking to you until we achieve it and the most fascinating experience so far in this portfolio is one of the events the Spanish presidency has organized it was in Madrid the Spanish presidency had invited 800 European young researchers and innovators and startups and they were offered hotel accommodation and the 800 said no way we are not taking your offer for hotel accommodation we want tents they were very useful tents they were sleeping there only a couple of hours getting out for days they were staying there gathering in just units so to say one for creative digitization another for building robots there were gurus so to say invited to question and answer and the whole procedure was going on and at a certain moment the guru was standing there reading lips and I was asking my people who is that and he said you are only familiar with Steve Jobs when you were explaining Steve Bollmer but this is your generation so to say and he addressed to his young people and he said look at them they are the past generation that is me it was not the delegation I was with that were my excellent people but he said and if they are not doing their utmost they are the lost generation and then later on I was just discussing with those youngsters by the way the youngest was 14 he had already three inventions he had started two companies and they were discussing with each other with their computers and at a certain moment I said to one come on you are sharing your secret why are you sharing your secret for it is your invention you shouldn't and he started to laugh and he said you are of indeed another generation to put it nicely we are sharing for at the end of the day the two or more of us are getting a better result and that is absolutely but it was a clear message for me in this field it is completely different from what I have as experience that the older generation is teaching the younger generation being an economist by training in this field it is the younger generation that is teaching me so now we are just thinking over and organizing, trying to organize that of very wise professors as advisors and I am still a professor impressed by your knowledge and your wisdom but I need those youngsters on board of advice for doing the job properly and I need you so I sincerely hope that the fellowship will be acceptable for you thank you