As representatives of European member states discuss the suggestedDigital Omnibus, the Europeans are split.
Historically, certain individuals have raised concerns, perceiving the Digital Omnibus as a risk to Europeans’ privacy and online freedoms, while casting doubt on the legality of the Omnibus itself.
On the contrary, behind closed doors, certain officials acknowledge that maybe the Commission’s Digital Omnibus initiative (designed to support European companies) could have been more ambitious, considering the European habit of significantly diluting bold proposals.
Within the European Union, there exists a wide range of perspectives that contribute to a more balanced approach in political decision-making and its impact on the lives of Europeans. Nevertheless, it appears that European businesses have been insufficiently active and not vocal enough over the years, resulting in an inadequate response when a minor change from the current situation is introduced in the Omnibus(es).
Regrettably, numerous Europeans today find themselves trapped in a realm of imaginative thinking: they desire European enterprises to grow larger, more powerful, and thus globally competitive, yet without modifying the regulations that European companies themselves identify as the primary hindrance to their operations.
Key challenges for European technology: not a US issue, but a European one
Critics who lack intellectual integrity often claim that the Digital Omnibus is a product of American influence and lobbying. Nevertheless, a genuine advocate for European competitiveness, Mario Draghi, has consistently supported the very reforms that the European Commission is currently pursuing.
The top challenges for European businesses continue to be unchanged: besides limited access to funding, inconsistent regulations throughout the EU, a significant regulatory load, elevated compliance expenses, and unclear regulatory expectations all cause European firms to concentrate on meeting requirements rather than expanding and, eventually, competing internationally.
As mentioned by Draghi in hisspeechin September, making the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) simpler continuesone of the most evident requestsamong European businesses. Furthermore, the GDPR hasincreased the data expenses by approximately 20% for European companies, in contrast to their American counterparts.
A second comment relates to the AI Act. Draghi explicitly referred to it“another source of uncertainty”and recommended delaying the enforcement of the AI Act for high-risk AI systemsuntil we gain a clearer insight into the disadvantages.
No quick fixes: the Digital Omnibus represents just the initial phase
Although the Digital Omnibus is a positive move, as are theEU’s Data Union Strategyand the upcoming Digital Fitness Check, both European companies and officials must not delay. They should take full advantage of these opportunities, while also preparing and organizing for backup plans B and C.
Just as with other areas, significant transformation in Europe takes place through various efforts and actions – and a great deal more needs to be done for European companies to achieve genuine opportunities to enhance their competitiveness.
This week, AI Chamberand a group of organizations (including our parent organization, the Consumer Choice Center Europe) representing Czechia, Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Lithuania, Denmark, Bulgaria, and other countries sent aletterTo the Council of the European Union and Members of the European Parliament, calling on them to take advantage of the Digital Omnibus and to concentrate on additional reforms required for European businesses to enhance their competitiveness.
The letter shows strong backing for the European Commission’s work on the Digital Omnibus, yet highlights that the range of topics might not be adequate. The signatories recommend that the Digital Omnibus proposal should be seen as an initial move, rather than a concluding objective, in aiding European companies to enhance their digital competitiveness.
The letter advocates for streamlining the AI Act, delaying its enforcement by two years, and making sure that regulations regarding the use of legitimate interest in AI development are clear, consistent, and uniformly applied throughout the EU.
In conclusion, the letter makes a subtle critique of those who support European strategic autonomy yet desire to maintain the status quo without implementing meaningful changes that could benefit European businesses’ expansion:
It states, ‘We cannot expect to attain true ‘strategic autonomy’ if we are unable to create our own core technologies.’
This piece was initially released on EU Tech Loop and has been distributed as part of a collaboration with EU Tech Loop.
About the Author
