Forces driving change: training, innovating,
accelerating the digital transformation
- Jean-Marie Cadiou, Director of the
Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS), Joint
Research Centre, European Commission
- Gérard Roucairol, Scientific Director
of Bull
- Jacques Dunogué, member of the executive
board of Alcatel
- Agnès Touraine, Chairman and CEO
of Vivendi Universal Publishing
- Jean-Jacques Duby, Director-General
of the École supérieure d'électricité
(higher electricity school)
- Jacques Stern, Director of the data
processing department at the École normale supérieure
(higher school for training teachers)
Debate with the public
Synthesis of the talks, by Didier
Lombard
INTRODUCTION
TO THE TALKS :
Alain COSTES :
« The action taken by the Ministry of Research in the subject
discussed today is based around the following three main points:
- the creation of innovative technology companies,
- partnership between the economic community and that of public
research,
- and lastly Europe.
Regarding the creation of innovative technology companies, I'll
now give you a few indicators and results.
The competition, launched in 1999, rewarded seven hundred and
eighty-two prize-winners and above all led to the creation of
three hundred and two companies over the past two years, 57% of
which belong to the information and communication technologies
sector.
We have also set up a certain number of incubators, particularly
to help public sector researchers to create their company. Thirty-one
incubators are today operational, four hundred and forty projects
have already incubated and one hundred and sixty-one companies
have been created this way, 42% of them belonging to the information
and communications technologies sector.
Great efforts have been made to create innovative companies: in
two years, after the July 1999 Act on Innovation, nearly five
hundred companies have been created, 47% of which are in the field
discussed today.
Turning to the technological partnership between the socioeconomic
sector and public research, great effort is devoted to the national
networks of innovative technological research. There are sixteen
such networks today, four directly concerning the subject of today's
debates:
- the software technologies network,
- the telecommunications network,
- the micro and nanotechnologies network,
- the content network, with in particular everything related to
the audiovisual sector, in other words the RIAM (Audiovisual Multimedia
Research and Innovation) network.
These networks take the form of projects. Incidentally, as far
as the Ministry of Research is concerned, no project file took
more than eight months to be addressed positively. Files are today
processed in an average of seven months and we hope be even quicker.
Any 'label' given by the network is validated by the ministry.
There are currently sixteen national technological research centres
and some of them are devoted to technology and information sciences:
- Grenoble for micro and nanotechnologies,
- Marcoussis for optics and optoelectronics,
- Rennes-Lannion-Brest for images,
- and Sofia Antipolis for telecommunications in general.
Lastly, Europe forms the major challenge for the months ahead.
As you know, the Minister for Research has been very active on
behalf of the French government in preparing the sixth framework
programme as regards three main points. First, focussing on a
certain number of fields that are very important to our mind,
where Europe contributes a major plus; second, more flexibility;
and third, use of the new instruments-excellence networks and
integrated programmes.
I feel I can say that the efforts made by research bodies, universities,
businesses and manufacturers have enabled France to be entirely
ready today for the sixth framework programme for which you know
that the call for proposals and ideas was launched around 20 March
2002. In this respect we undertook a vast information and awareness-raising
campaign in the field throughout France.
Also one should not forget either the major issues of intellectual
or industrial property, which will probably be the most difficult
point to address in setting consortiums in place.
These are therefore the actions taken by the ministry. Lastly
I wish to offer you all the minister's excuses for his absence
today. Remember, the ministry is particularly attentive to CSTI's
work.»
Didier LOMBARD :
«
I firstly wish to recall, for those who are unaware, what the
CSTI is and what it achieves.
Created less than a year ago, on 11 April 2001, CSTI is a board
composed of businessmen, researchers and a few financiers. No
general government representative sits on it, and that's voluntary.
The board has been created to think about the measures to be taken
to facilitate the advent of the world of information and communication
technologies in France. All issues are analysed collegially and
freely in it. CSTI is also led to give opinions on more specific
matters.
We work with the resources allocated by our supporting ministries,
especially the Ministry of Industry and the CGTI (General Council
for Information Technologies). Furthermore the Ministry of Research
has given us all the means to carry out the studies whose results
will be presented to you later.
I therefore thank our two ministries and understand their frustration.
They give us the means to live but do not participate in our work
and they will also endure the conclusions we reach! Indeed we
do not have an operational role and our conclusions are communicated
as part of the normal decisional process of administrative bodies.
We have as a model two organisations more famous than ours. The
first is the Conseil de politiques économiques (CPE-Economic
Policies Board), which has communicated many important reports
for the country. Our second model is of course the PITAC (President's
Information Technology Advisory Committee). That committee also
operates with the help of business managers and researchers in
advising the President of the United States on the policies to
be implemented. Those who are curious can moreover consult its
website, a real mine of extremely detailed and documented reports
on all the topics of interest to us.
Since last year, two points have shown that CSTI could take visible
action. I'm referring, first, to UMTS licenses and technology,
a matter about which we were questioned immediately at the time
of our creation. I'm unaware of the influence of our intervention
on the final decision, but we at least participated in it. CSTI
has also contributed actively to the standardisation of the e-learning
industry by helping in producing the Internet schools charter
and by implementing the procedures to grant these schools a label.
You'll see later on just how essential training is in information
technology policies, and e-learning is very important in this
respect.
As for the work of the committee itself, we identified at the
time of our creation four major topics which were to be the basis
of our discussions.
The first concerned access and speed aspects: what needed to be
done so that everyone could have access to the speed necessary
for him to carry on his activity, wherever he might be in the
territory? This brought up the issue of the digital or geographical
divide.
The second subject is a corollary of the latter, referring to
service contents and the take-up by the general public of all
these marvellous opportunities we all imagine but which do not
always enjoy the success they deserve.
Apart from these two prerequisites, there are two factors of success.
The first comprises everything to do with training-without limiting
oneself to the training of post-graduates, which is the quite
natural tendency of our country. France indeed too often devotes
its attention to the grandes écoles. We at CSTI have done
everything necessary so that the telecommunications schools considerably
increase their output of engineers. But it is also vital to have
all the necessary technicians for the networks to operate.
The second factor, certainly not the lesser, concerns all research
and innovation matters. Everyone knows that our country has only
very few natural resources. The 'deposit' on which a large part
of its economic activity is based is innovation and the strength
of its laboratories and research centres, whether private or public.
I was in this respect very pleased to hear Mr Coste's remarks.
Everything which improves the 'machine's output' is heading in
the right direction. This is a deposit on which we absolutely
must capitalise.
Summing up, that's the action CSTI has been taking for nearly
a year. A few days ago, we communicated our interim report-will
our work ever come to an end?-to the Prime Minister. It was indeed
logical for us to transmit to him before the end of this parliamentary
term the work he had commissioned from us.
Furthermore, we also thought it was necessary for us, at this
stage, to open and broaden the debate. A board like ours is, per
se, closed. It's a kind of small club where we hear experts from
the sector. But a number of our fellow citizens certainly have
good ideas and must feel frustrated at not being able to inform
us of them.
That's the reason why we're holding these first CSTI talks-which
implies others will follow-in order to broaden our discussions
and enrich them with the viewpoints of the various players involved
who were ignored to date by our work. »
DIGITAL
PROXIMITY, A VITAL ISSUE FOR SMEs AND INDIVIDUALS
René TRÉGOUËT :
« The Rhône department decided already thirteen
years ago, whereas the law was scarcely on its side, to build
an optical network. At the time it was accused of being unrealistic.
It was to be a large dimension network. It can be said today that
the Rhône department is the only place in France where all
villages are served, even the smallest.
Everyone knows our department by its chief town, Lyon. Yet it
should also be known that, on its own, the Rhône is a mini
French territory. You find vineyards, forests and some villages
of under a hundred inhabitants. This department is not therefore
specifically urban: a third of its population lives in the countryside.
We realised that if we left things alone without intervening,
a department like ours, with a large dynamic city, was likely
to experience two-speed growth before fifteen years were up. The
chief town would be inevitably equipped with high technologies
and the rest of the department would lack them. Given the importance
these new technologies are going to assume in human activity in
the years ahead, such a difference would have been against the
department's purpose to provide services locally.
We therefore launched this project that was entirely unique for
the time. It took a lot of political determination. We launched
a European invitation to tender, following which the Time Warner
group arrived by our side in the mid-1990s. Network construction
will be totally finished within the next fourteen months and will
have cost some 1.6 billion francs.
This unique hub in France will allow 80% of the population to
be served in a department that nevertheless has some 1.65 million
inhabitants. Our department is already, to date, the only one
in France where this optical network offers not only cable TV,
but also high-speed Internet and telephone services. Annecy had,
admittedly, started experimentation but has not commercialised
it on a large scale.
Why carry out this operation? It appeared important to us to
establish another network alongside-or opposite, many debates
are taking place on this subject-that of France Télécom.
In effect, there is no point in legislation being enacted on unbundling:
as long as there is no infrastructure competing with that of the
dominating operator, our country will not turn the corner. This
is evidenced by the fact that, given the speed with which our
optical fibre is progressing, our department is the one where
the dominating operator is making most proposals-and even in small
towns-for ADSL technology. Moreover it is entirely right to take
advantage of the situation, it's the law of the market.
This example quite clearly shows that new technologies develop
faster in places where genuine competition exists. The Rhône
department, enjoying such extraordinary experimentation, is living
proof of this.
We have devoted some four hundred and fifty million francs of
public money to this operation. No operator will find any immediate
profitability in a small village, so the entire operation was
therefore balanced by public money.
We in fact asked for a reciprocal concession, and in the mid-1990s
nobody thought that would be possible. The telecommunications
deregulation Act had not yet been voted. Since we were investing
public money, this network was to have a capacity reserved free
of charge to the community. That way we created an Intranet complying
with that condition, and it will become the biggest in France.
I even think that this coherent public Intranet will be immediately
able to connect some one thousand five hundred public access points,
each of which will have a speed of 2 megabits. The Intranet will
therefore connect the department's schools, colleges and libraries,
free of charge, all round the clock every day of the year.
A recent study has shown us that the rollout of an Intranet of
this size by a private operator, without the agreement we made
with UPS, would have reached a financial cost far beyond our resources.
Thanks to the system set in place, it can be estimated that our
investment of four hundred and fifty million francs will be recouped
in less than ten years while integrating, of course, in the calculation
the cost-effectiveness for public bodies today enjoying use of
this network.
In addition-perhaps this will make you smile-we asked the operator,
today UPC, to give us simply 1% of the turnover when he starts
making money. Perhaps we should have drawn inspiration from this
agreement for the UMTS?
We will thus have carried out an extraordinary spatial planning
initiative: all the inhabitants will be served. We are currently
in phase 3 and the physical networks reach 80% of the population.
We are currently starting, with ART's (Telecommunications Regulatory
Authority) authorisation, experimentation on radio technologies
to cover the remaining 20%; this network will of course be based
on optical fibre technology.
Once this work is completed we'll be able to consider we have
done a useful job for our department because the professions of
the future will be able to be exercised not only in la Part-Dieu,
in downtown Lyon, but also anywhere else in the department. We
indeed know very well that, before five years are up, no company
will set up in any part of France without access to a broadband
digital connection. Everyone should be clearly aware of that.
Lastly, I wish to emphasise that this project, not a virtual
reality but well advanced, shows us the way we should head. »
Jean-François ABRAMATIC
:
« The papers presented till now concerned
the infrastructure and networks, in other words everything below
the IP layer. Our group has mainly taken an interest, within CSTI,
in applications and services.
The aim of CSTI's work is to try and take stock of the situation,
define the major challenges and see what actions could be implemented
in the short term so as to head to a more distant goal. Finding
ourselves today in a large lecture hall like this allows us to
get our breath back and envisage the prospects awaiting us in
the longer term.
I will insist on a field which, within the applications and services
sector, has given rise to most enthusiasm: the Web. Everything
that has been done around its development will allow me to guide
our discussions on the way in which information technologies can
influence the evolution of society, thereby playing their role
in developing the information society.
Speaking of a vision entails projecting oneself into the future;
however the past, in this field, is not so distant. The Web was
invented as recently as 1990 by Tim Berners-Lee, at the CERN in
Geneva, a laboratory using information technologies. It was not
invented in a data processing or telecommunications research laboratory
so researchers must not be too arrogant.
There is a certain logic in this: information technologies are
built on the results of previous work. These technologies develop
and accumulate over time and if the Web has developed so rapidly
it's because it has been based on forty years work. For instance
Tim Berners-Lee developed his prototype with the benefit of the
telecommunications infrastructure rolled out in previous years.
Still today our work is based on the body of technologies accumulated
over the past forty years. We should remember that befofre projecting
ourselves into the future.
Our discussions can be based on three subjects. First we must
try to make computers serve users.
Once again I will use the Web as an example, even if my remarks
can of course be generalised to other Internet applications. When
Tim Berners-Lee had the idea of combining hypertext navigation
with the Internet network the concept appeared so megalomaniac-clicking
on a link and seeking information at the other end of the planet-that
he proposed very simple technological elements. For example, the
chosen language (HTML) can describe text and images, but Tim Berners-Lee's
version comprised only text. It was Marc Andriessen's version,
in 1993 that allowed Internet deployment of Web pages and the
introduction of images.
Text and images are what could be called in the world of knowledge
the raw material of information-sequences of characters or of
bits describing a document or image. We would however find it
difficult to make computers serve users with such a 'raw' raw
material. Among the work-coordinated in particular by W3C-which
the Web community has undertaken in recent years, the great idea
has therefore been to better structure information.
This project has led to the development of XML language allowing
structured data to be described and allowing other materials than
text and images to become 'first class citizens' on the Web. I
am thinking for instance about databases. The entire range of
information in a company can now find its place on the Web, and
finally the user stands to gain.
The products and services being developed at technology small
and large companies are therefore based on this new infrastructure
with greater functionalities than the infrastructure that allowed
access to the general public.
But how is the user going to turn this to good account? That's
where the currently emerging wave of Web services should allow
individuals and SMEs to turn this infrastructure to better account.
The following two subjects of our discussion, more focused on
the user himself, are both major challenges: universal access
and the Web of trust.
It should be recalled that today less than 5% of the world population
has Internet access. A developed country like France has only
20 to 30% of users-the figures vary depending on the way indicators
are interpreted-mostly using computers.
Obviously, to impact the information society, the Web will require
more than that single channel. Internet access will naturally
have to be extended to other terminals than computers.
Furthermore, the work on internationalisation and ease of access
will naturally be essential in achieving the universality aim
implied by the determination to build an information society.
Such a society cannot be built by leaving 95% of the population
by the wayside.
As for the Web of trust, it should be recalled that we are today
using Tim Berners-Lee's Web prototype. I explained previously
the technological reasons for this while referring to the evolution
of contents from text and images to structured data. Other aspects
concern the trust one can have in this set of products and services
in executing the critical tasks of everyday life, whether as an
individual or an SME.
All the issues regarding security, confidentiality, personal
data protection, and combating illicit contents, are therefore
fundamental. Lastly, another important point, royalties are today
essential and an ever growing challenge, whether in terms of contents
or technologies. Technology must allow innovation to be protected
and give creators a fair return on their investment. »
Robert VERRUE :
«
I will begin by presenting you with what could be an idealised
digital vision from the European viewpoint, and I will illustrate,
through two examples, the manner in which we are trying in practice
to bring together the conditions for digital proximity, particularly
for SMEs and SMIs.
As with all its other fields of action-and above all when industrial
and technological challenges are involved-the European Union tries
to take advantage of the size effects represented by the world's
first market of approximately 350 million inhabitants, without
mentioning the candidate countries which, in our fields, are already
taking pains to follow regulatory approaches close to ours. We
hope, moreover, that the new regulatory framework recently adopted
by the European Union ministers for telecommunications will lead
us to fairer competition throughout this large European market.
As for digital proximity, our approach is based on four points:
infrastructures, affordable tariffs, easy access to a large number
of applications (particularly professional) and access to a diversified
portfolio of technologies.
I will address first of all digital proximity from the viewpoint
of infrastructures. This problem is not of course specific to
information and communication technologies. It is complicated
however by the fact that the development of infrastructures supported
particularly by the public authorities-including European authorities
via the funding of projects through structural funds-must take
account of the efficacy of a competition policy.
Public intervention is still necessary today in many areas of
the EU, including some French regions. This action concerns access
to fixed or mobile technologies to encourage SMEs to set up in
less favoured areas, and also infrastructures with bandwidths
sufficiently broad to be considered professional.
Referring to the tariff approach to digital proximity, the European
policy regarding the organisation of competition should ensure
efficacy. This regulatory infrastructure should logically produce
affordable tariff conditions allowing SMEs to overcome their possible
access handicap. This official discourse is most often encountered
in practice above all when the State manages to focus its intervention
on the installation of complementary network meshing, especially
in the local loop.
Our last two possible conceptions of digital proximity can easily
be understood. Diversification in the form of access to applications
as advanced and accessible as possible is indeed a prerequisite
of digital proximity. This is the main field where SMEs suffer
a major handicap with respect to large companies. The former must
be able to find in the market applications, software or know-how,
which the latter develop most often by themselves.
The European Union is particularly interested in digital proximity,
and not only for regional policy or spatial planning reasons.
More fundamentally, in terms of economic competitiveness, we are
convinced that communication and information technologies-and
above all their applications-will not produce all their economic
effects until SMEs have access to advanced technologies in competitive
conditions.
The information we have shows a frequent and dangerous underestimation-which
could eventually be fatal-of many SMEs and SMIs: the importance
of their mastery of these technologies for the long-term existence
of their activity. In effect, through the North American example,
it can be seen that the major platforms developed by manufacturing
industries (particularly in the car sector) are going to jeopardise
SMEs that have not launched sufficiently early into e-commerce.
Digital proximity is thus becoming a prerequisite for the competitiveness
of our companies.
Later on I'll give you two examples of the way in which the European
Union intends to proceed.
Our reference framework is the e-Europe action plan. We share
it with the other Member States which have on several occasions
'consolidated' it at the European Council. This programme was
adopted at Lisbon under the Portuguese presidency. Its first deadline
falls in 2002. The second deadline will be firmly established
by the Seville European Council but was already the subject of
discussions at the Barcelona European Council. The aim is to transform
the first programme into a second action plan 2005, with a strengthened
applications content.
In a way it's the 'railway timetable' that Europe intends to
follow for everything related to stepping up the rollout of technologies
and their applications towards the information society. In this
context the EU is conducting a series of actions promoting digital
proximity.
I will mention two of them:
- a European strategy for professional applications of chip cards;
- an initiative, called Go Digital, more targeted towards SMEs,
promoting information society applications.
I know that chip card technology is well known in France but
it should be stressed that it will be essential at world level
for the development of everything related to mobile transactions.
It raises a whole series of questions involving regulatory, security-related
and interoperability-related aspects, which must be solved as
soon as possible. We today have a European strategy in this field
which is being developed by thirty or so manufacturers.
Our action is relevant in the digital proximity field, particularly
for SMEs and SMIs which are indeed typically very open to mobile
and remote transactions. However this type of transaction can
be carried out only in satisfactory security conditions, the basic
instrument being the chip card. The latter must, at one and the
same time, be identified, secure and confidential, and this procedure
is meaningless unless carried out at least at the European level.
Our initiative gave rise to strong interest at our two main partners,
the USA and Japan, which leads us to believe that our present
direction is the right one. There will be very concrete spin-off
for SMEs.
Go Digital is an initiative of a different nature, which is aimed
at removing the main obstacles, particularly regulatory, encountered
by SMEs in accessing the major e-commerce platforms developed
in recent years. It aims at making up for the shortcoming noted
by a recent study on the relative absence of European SMEs in
e-commerce, particularly in traditional industrial activities.
Comparison with North American SMEs clearly shows this shortcoming.
We therefore developed this GO Digital initiative on the basis
of the weaknesses and blockages which are so many serious handicaps
for European small and medium enterprises.
That is therefore what Brussels understands by digital proximity,
what we try to do and the results we are witnessing are beginning
to accumulate. In conclusion it should be stressed that we feel
digital proximity is not only a vital challenge for SMEs but also
a prerequisite for the competitiveness of the European economy
as a whole. »
Thierry BRETON :
« Our working group has worked more specifically
on the topic of infrastructures and networks in order to answer
the question: what development is to be planned for infrastructures
and what network rollout strategy is necessary?
CSTI is of course an independent body formed by people of various
origins whose common point is their interest for technologies
and for their country. I am therefore very pleased about Mr Verrue's
presence upstream of an issue like that of the high-speed network.
I remember the UMTS issue where Europe arrived downstream of
national decisions. We then had to manage a catastrophic situation
at European level, even though CSTI had previously alerted the
public authorities about a situation running against the interest
of everyone, consumers and operators alike. We interceded with
the Prime Minister who heeded us. While France thus took a great
step forward, the rest of Europe unfortunately remains on the
sidelines. This situation will probably impact the harmonisation
and distortion of competition.
Hence the need to analyse together these issues very much upstream.
We therefore worked together on the following topic: what should
be done so that high-speed services avoid the digital, geographical
and social divide?
In a first stage we gave the simplest definition of high speed,
in other words the possibility of having a few hundred bits permanently
accessible at home to download video or music and exchange files.
We then sought to draw up an appraisal of the situation in other
European and world countries. Everyone knows that Korea has acquired
a huge advance. We have also observed that countries where high-speed
Internet is spreading massively are those where a strong public
authority incentive exists in one form or another. This can be
expressed directly at State level, but also, for instance, via
the länder in Germany or the various states of the United
States. This shows that the public authorities have become aware
of their role in helping the development of high-speed Internet.
The community should remember that.
Disparities at European level are still relatively limited. The
time is therefore well chosen in France to discuss this issue.
We haven't fallen dramatically behind other European countries
and are moreover even ahead of some. France is simply average,
whereas the technologies it has, the strength of its historic
operator, the advent of alternative operators and the partiality
of the French public should allow it to do much better. The stage
is set for a quite rapid rollout of broadband in France, hopefully.
Our report and its annexes mention the case studies of the various
European countries. In particular we followed with great interest
countries like Sweden, the Netherlands and Germany.
We then tried to determine which available technologies would
provide a rapid answer to the problem raised. In effect our work
fits clearly into the framework of the government plan aimed at
covering the entire French population with high speed Internet
by 2005. This deadline still leaves us a bit of time but we must
get to work straight away.
ADSL is of course one of these technologies. It appears today
the most appropriate and best suited to meeting this demand in
the months ahead. Cable is also on the list, even if it offers
more limited access conditions. It concerns eight million French
households, whereas France Télécom thinks it can
offer ADSL to 75% of households before the end of 2002 and to
80% the following year. This is therefore a technology with the
capacity to cover nearly all the French population, even if we
are fully aware that the cover rate can never reach 100%..
Bidirectional satellite must for the moment be considered an
alternative technology meeting needs specifically in areas not
covered by other technologies. The local radio loop, for its part,
is aimed rather at SMEs.
You will therefore have understood that CSTI clearly recommends
supporting the rollout of ADSL in the national territory. This
solution appears to us today the most relevant owing to its availability.
We have however identified a few elements that may hinder the
development process, including the cost factor. I am in a good
position to know that a difference of 10 or 20 euros for a radio
receiver or a decoder can lead to a mass product or one priced
out of the market. Mass penetration necessarily implies the major
impact of a price difference. Perhaps the current 40 euros for
subscribing to ADSL appear modest to you, but households feel
very strongly the difference between 200 and 300 francs. Without
taking a stand on price, we have clearly identified that a 300
franc subscription is a brake on mass penetration, at least during
the initial phase. Without taking the place of the regulators
or operators, we point out that cooperation on this aspect is
essential if we want the operation to be launched rapidly.
I feel this issue is more important than that of the terminal
itself. CSTI has a few ideas on the issue-like VAT reductions-and
has noted them as matter of interest. It is essential that all
the players take an interest in this issue very quickly. It appeared
to CSTI that a price offer around 190 to 200 francs would represent
an incentive to subscribe.
We also insisted on the preponderant role of the historic operator
in this matter. It is moreover ready today to study our proposals.
In any case we must move very fast, yet without destabilising
the various players involved, including the historic operator.
Once this issue has been addressed, the question of shadow areas
will remain. Our report classifies the various sectors into four
areas. The first two, covered by existing technologies, could
experience rapid penetration. In areas 3 and 4, the population
is not dense enough for a sufficient economy of scale in these
services. We therefore urge the national and local public authorities
to intervene. The renegotiation of State-Region Plan Contracts
is a good opportunity to integrate this dialectic here. It will
be necessary to set up funding with a high degree of mixed participation
to achieve balance. CSTI has moreover communicated various proposals
in this respect. We insist on the fact that the public authorities
will have to participate in one manner or another in areas 3 and
4
Lastly I wish to add that the discussion on high speed is merely
an interim step: France must take an interest straight away in
very high speed. Serge Tchuruk, Chairman and CEO of Alcatel and
a member of CSTI, told us about his company's position in the
optical fibre sector. This is an absolutely essential field. We
believe that very high speed Internet should be carried almost
exclusively by fibre. This topic also raises the complex problem
of the connection of households and blocks of flats.
We have therefore listed the technologies which appear most relevant
to us, particularly wireless networks and the much spoken of 802.11
standard, including 802.11B where we are on frequencies that are
still higher.
We have used our capacity to make recommendations to the public
authorities by putting forward the idea of a full-scale test of
very high speed in one or two test towns. This entails frequencies
of around 10 to 20 megabits/second. We need to test the possibility
of connecting whole blocks of flats.
I will not speak here of the role that could be played by the
company RTE (Réseaux de transport de l'électricité
- electricity transport networks), but our group has studied the
possibility of using it to lay optical fibres and create a large
optical fibres backbone in France.
In conclusion, this issue is very important for the competitiveness
of France and its companies. We are all aware that it will require
European harmonisation and feel that the matter is this time being
addressed at the right time. CSTI has, moreover, told the Prime
Minister that there is still time to avoid the UMTS errors and
encourage Europe to introduce the fullest harmonisation possible.
»
Anne-Sophie
PASTEL : 
« Our group has more specifically worked
on the topic of applications and services. The aim has been to
determine the factors and actions that could introduce the conditions
allowing French players to reach the best level in this field.
First, we focused on setting in place the conditions to develop
the supply of applications and services. We strove to identify
the blockages to be removed to ensure this development.
We firstly discussed how to make it easier to develop micropayment.
Some offers and services can be paid by advertising or e-commerce.
But a certain number of other services are already experiencing
payment problems whereas simple micropayment solutions would be
envisageable, along the lines of what has been done on the Minitel.
Our group recommends the creation of a project team that can advance
the topic, bearing in mind that while solutions exist, they are
neither universal nor necessarily user-friendly.
The second element of this discussion concerned more specifically
streaming. In effect, we are currently witnessing some royalty
problems, for instance for the streaming of films over the Web.
Here too we have made recommendations for Internet streaming rights
to be acquired once a certain number of other rights have been
assigned. In this respect we recommend several regulatory measures
which are detailed in the report.
Lastly, our work also concerned the setting up of a uses observation
laboratory observing and anticipating future behaviours, then
sharing this information with the various players working on future
developments.
Second, we focused on how to get the general public, SMEs and
SMIs to take up these new technologies and how public action could
facilitate the process.
As for the general public, incentives aimed at accelerating the
digitising of holdings would allow our entire know-how heritage
to be shared and exchanged.
Lastly, our third recommendation is to ensure that the various
services and portals proposed by the Administration allow the
user to monitor his personal information. Apart from the site
http://www.service-public.fr,
which provides only very general information, there is a need
today to group the various administrative initiatives to simplify
them and make them lighter for the user. »
DEBATE WITH THE PUBLIC
François DUBRULE, Chief Executive
Officer of Angel-Invest :
« I manage a venture capital company and I heard Mr Breton
tell us about his entire confidence in the software instruments
available to high speed users. But one cannot help wondering today
about the health of telecom operators.
You have heard, like me, that two companies which recently launched
into high speed Internet have failed.
On what therefore do you base your confidence and your feeling
that the entire French population will be concerned and positively
impacted, bearing in mind the financial stress experienced presently
by telecommunications companies? »
Thierry BRETON :
« I don't have to teach you your job, but companies working
in emergent technologies must know how to invest at the right
time and when the market allows.
We feel that, if all this is done voluntarily and if the technologies
are ripe, the craze for high speed Internet coming to our attention
is worth taking this industrial risk. Perhaps tariffs will have
to be lowered initially, but demand should then be even greater.
In any case, the technologies are ready and ADSL rollout has already
been very strong. I therefore feel the time is right to push our
efforts to a new level. The market was relatively timid till now.
France still has only 400,000 subscribers. A subscription price
of approximately 30 euros should significantly boost the market.
But how can the existing operators manage to make an offer of
this level? Demand is there, especially among youths. Prices should
therefore be lowered, thereby ushering in a mass market.
Furthermore more and more services are being offered by this type
of technology. People are beginning to download video today. A
few weeks ago we managed to compress video using ADSL technologies
at 700 kilobits/second, whereas a short while ago we did not believe
we would exceed 1.5 megabits/second.
We can therefore propose real time television via ADSL. It can
be believed that a whole range of pay-per-view services will emerge.
Moreover we envisage the possibility of streaming, via ADSL, programme
packages presently broadcast using other technologies. This would
help to solve the problems encountered in towns in receiving satellite
programme packages.
The price aspect will therefore be essential and we feel that
if the regulator and the operators come to an agreement on an
acceptable tariff, the operation should enjoy a considerable boost.
Furthermore, services are arriving fast now, particularly as regards
video. »
Didier LOTH, Deputy Director General
at the General Council of the Oise Department :
« One of the reports refers to the need for local authorities
to invest strongly in infrastructures. The example given by Mr
Trégouët shows moreover the need to introduce competition
to the situation everyone knows.
My second remark concerns the ongoing consultation on the draft
circular drafted by DATAR, DiGITIP and the Ministry of the Interior
on the implementation of Article 15-11-6 of the General code of
territorial units. In its new drafting, the latter gives slightly
more investment possibilities to territorial units than in the
past.
However this draft raises the massive objection of all the elected
representatives. The association des départements de France
(Association of French departments) called for its immediate withdrawal,
as did the association des maires des villes de France (Association
of mayors of French towns). Apparently the drafters of the circular
do not know about CSTI's work. There are two opinions within the
governmental bodies and I ask CSTI to state its position on this
draft circular. »
Thierry BRETON :
« Territorial units have been taking an interest in telecommunication
issues for a long time, which is heartening. Moreover, the State-Region
Plan Contracts have shown the progressive involvement of these
units in these fields.
Once again, CSTI does not make laws: it just gives opinions. There
is therefore no conflict here. We simply recommended dealing with
shadow areas as regards high speed Internet. These, moreover,
may well exist in densely populated sectors.
We therefore proposed an invitation to tender approach to map
France so as to locate economically viable areas and ones which
probably would not be so and would require public aid. The procedure
is described in the report.
I know that some Regional or General Councils have got ahead,
but it nevertheless appeared important to us that the Regions
should acquire skills, even modest, in the telecommunications
field. Some local authorities indeed wish to have their own independent
experts.
We feel however that the State should keep a certain intervention
and advice capacity. It is necessary to be somewhat selective
regarding projects. In this respect the State can help via a sort
of experts committee, which proposal was made by CSTI to the Prime
Minister. »
René TRÉGOUËT :
« I feel that the circular should not be given more importance
than it deserves. Moreover it is likely that it will never be
applied. This circular went much further in its drafting and did
not respect either the will or the spirit of the legislator. Historically,
indeed, the well-known amendment of June 1999-the so-called 'black
fibres' amendment-has been caught up by another decision of 2001.
This circular in no way meets the expectations of territorial
units which hoped rather for an implementing decree to know how
they could intervene financially. That decree is unfortunately
not yet published, which is a handicap for French territorial
units wishing to invest in this field.
Further, this circular is far from being technologically neutral.
On reading it, it can be seen that it favours one of these technologies
and underestimates all the others to cover the whole territory.
However, the most important thing is to make it possible for territorial
units to use all types of technology. I admit, as I know the subject
well, that optical fibre will probably be the main carrier in
the future.
To answer Mr Loth, I feel that the department is perfectly suited
to this problem. Whenever communes (local government districts)
are sufficiently densely populated they address the matter themselves
and find balance within their own perimeter. They therefore leave
aside the other communes of the department that do not have the
required capacity. I come from a region which stretches from the
Mediterranean to the Swiss border: it is unreasonable, in such
a large territory, to imagine a coherent rollout in a very short
time.
The department has always, for two centuries now, built all the
major networks in France: departmental road networks, and the
water and electricity networks. Departments therefore find here
a new challenge to fulfil their solidarity role between towns,
medium-sized communes and small villages.
I also wish to draw CSTI's attention to the fact that one should
above all avoid creating 'digital ghettos' where people would
be helped to connect to high speed Internet. On the contrary,
it is necessary to mix the poor and rich sectors of each department:
this is the necessary prerequisite to find operators. Because,
after building a network, profitability questions arise. And ghettos
with a low population density will not interest operators.
We must be fully aware of this territorial solidarity and I feel
the department provides a suitable answer. »
Didier LOMBARD :
« The consequence of CSTI's freedom is that it is not
intended to be a decision-taking body. We will therefore circulate
the report brought to the knowledge of the Prime Minister two
days ago and will send it to all the prefects of France, which
should shed new light on the issue for them.
It should be remembered that when René Trégouët
built his network he was seen as a dangerous economic adventurer.
He has today managed to demonstrate that his project could work.
I am firmly convinced that the procedure described in the report
cannot work unless local authorities are thoroughly involved in
them and keep some freedom to manoeuvre. They must also be given
a minimum of expertise, since in this circle many try to get paid
for services with doubtful results. »
Jean-Jacques
DAMLAMIAN, Chief Executive Officer, France Télécom
:
« I am a member of CSTI and work at France Télécom,
so my intervention will show this double-hattedness.
The title of our meeting, 'Digital Technology for Everybody -
What Actions should the public authorities undertake?', already
contains a certain number of sub-questions. Does 'for everybody'
mean at the level of Europe, France, the region, a village…?
Then this other simple question arises: since the expected prices
must be equalised, who is going to pay? This is the central issue.
Solidarity in the Rhône department, jolly good! But perhaps
the Landes department will not deal with the question the same
way. If this is to be accepted at national level, remember that
prices will not be the same in the Rhône, the Landes or
the Oise. Is France ready to accept this? I think that, for the
time being, the republican spirit does not accept this very well.
However, as Mr Trégouët told us, 450 million francs
will have been spent on the inhabitants of the Rhône department.
It is therefore a kind of change in the equalisation that took
place in this department. Do we wish to extend this type of behaviour
to France as a whole? This is a real political problem and one
cannot have a different policy on the subject depending on whether
you live in Paris or Lyon, otherwise we would experience even
more deviations than those we see today.
Lastly, Mr Trégouët, I don't really see how the 1%
collected on the income of operators-when they start making money-will
enable repayment of 450 million francs. To achieve that they would
have to make a turnover of 45 billion francs whereas we see UPC
withdrawing today from the Seine-et-Marne department. Allow me
therefore to doubt that this money will one day find its way into
the coffers of the General Council.
Excuse me for putting it this way, but you have to know when to
be realistic. You can be for reducing taxes, for zero homeless
persons, for ADSL for everybody, but you can't be for all that
at the same time. »
René TRÉGOUËT :
« You know, for the past twelve years now, whenever I make
a speech a member of France Télécom objects to me
with this type of problem.
You have forgotten to say that I gave two elements for our return
on investment. Our Intranet would indeed be very expensive for
us if we also had to finance it and we should not underestimate
the importance of the public Intranet for departmental solidarity.
We can make use of it for free and the 450 million francs will
be recouped well before thirty years, the operator's 1% acting
like a kind of cherry on the cake.
I don't think I spent public money poorly in this respect. We
will be told one day that this was necessary for national solidarity.
We politicians cannot accept a France with thirty-six speeds.
A person without access to high speed Internet tomorrow will no
longer be in the mainstream.
Of course I know my argumentation differs from that of France
Télécom, but we need real competition. You know
very well that some European countries feel there is a shortage
in high speed distribution if there aren't two distributors, simply
because competition is essential. Otherwise there will be no point
in us inventing all sorts of measures, the playing field will
not be level.
I am at the head of a department that has been fighting for a
long time to achieve this and I will continue the fight. »
Didier LOMBARD :
« I wish to mention that the proposals made to the Prime
Minister by CSTI are aimed at getting the State to correct the
disparities between departments. Furthermore, the correlation
between competition and the rollout of high speed Internet appeared
very clearly to CSTI in all the countries studied. »
Martine LAPIERRE, chief technology officer, Alcatel
:
« Like Thierry Breton said, we feel
that interactive audiovisual television on broadband is a market
that can place both operators and telecom manufacturers on the
crest of the wave again. What is Europe doing and what can it
do to bring new life to this sector ? »
Robert VERRUE :
« As for high speeds, the first useful thing we can do is
to ensure that the matter is understood in a roughly comparable
way between States.
We have seen with interest that, since Lisbon, these issues have
been discussed recurrently at the level of heads of State and
government. Few industrial sectors can boast such an interest
at such a high political level. I find it rather encouraging that
broadband access conditions are recognised at the highest political
level as a fundamental issue.
An interactive discussion is currently taking place between the
States, and the e-Europe 2005 action plan will very certainly
comprise a chapter on the promotion of high speed.
This issue appears among the most important and it isn't the first
time that it will be discussed at European level. I am thinking
in particular of the European regulation on unbundled access to
the local loop, an essential matter with reference to the rollout
of access to broadband over the last kilometre. I must acknowledge
that, because it neglected in the past the technological neutrality
requirement recalled just now by Mr Trégouët, Europe
shirked for too long the need for an identical approach to the
unbundling of the local loop. Now that all that is done, we can
see the cost generated by this delay and unbundling is advancing
far too slow today throughout the European Union.
As for the funding of infrastructures in the peripheral regions
or regions receiving community credits under objectives 1 and
2, the European Structural Funds intervene to back up national
aids. Similarly, the competition policy adjusts the framework
for aids, particularly to productive infrastructures, depending
on the situation of regions.
I also think it is necessary to allow the relevant levels to decide
and that one should not determine, in advance, minute details
at European level, which would be absolutely inoperative. But
in a certain number of cases-of which the unbundling of the local
loop is a typical or even clinical example given the delay we
are incurring-Europe can put forward concepts framed in common.
Also Mr Trégouët is right when he insists on the need
to avoid favouring one technology at the expense of another. This
is an extremely dangerous game and the choice of technologies
must remain in the hands of operators who are to be placed in
competition. Otherwise there is a risk of finding oneself with
technologies for which large sums will have been invested, whereas
the risk has not been taken by the operators.
Mr Damlamian asked just now what was meant by the word 'everybody'
in the title of our debate. I feel like answering him: everybody
means everybody! As the Member States have committed to a universal
service, they cannot tolerate any exclusion. We experienced this
problem with electricity where tariffs must necessarily be modulated.
Moreover the guiding principle on the costs of access to essential
infrastructures inevitably leads us to tariff modulation. The
marginal cost of an additional kilometre for a given number of
megabits can never be the same from one region to another. It
is important for access to infrastructures to be open so that
no region finds itself trapped with one technology and so that
access tariffs reflect costs.
As for the remark on operators not making enough profits, the
accounts of France Télécom have just been presented
and it is interesting to look closely at the figures. At France
Télécom, as at many other operational European telecom
operators, including the historic operators, the results are fairly
positive. Their balance sheet situation is another matter. »
Dany VANDROMME, Director GIP RENATER
:
« I would like to draw CSTI's attention
to two specific points. We too often tend to consider the Internet
as a magical remedy that can cure all ills. We don't take a sufficient
interest in what the Internet really is. It is also made up of
international organisations and technologies.
We are too little aware of the action taken, particularly at European
level, to make it a medium for the development of these technologies
which, in the future, will constitute the world Internet standard.
The EU's action in this respect is exemplary in coordinating the
major actions in this field.
We often regret the absence of politics at standardisation bodies.
However, standardisation or a standard cannot be imposed only
on technological criteria. Political support from the government
or the Commission is also necessary.
I feel that security and exchange authentication are not discussed
enough. If exchanges were as secure as is said, micropayment wouldn't
be spoken about today: it would be automatically included in them.
The Internet of the future will necessarily be built on a base
of security for all exchanges, which will allow the existing economic
model to be scaled up. »
Jacques STERN :
« I wish to remark on what Mr Abramatic
said just now when he spoke about trust. As I participated in
the discussions that led to the liberalisation of cryptology,
I know that we have escaped a great danger.
That said, I occasionally panicked during today's debate. When
ADSL is spoken about I think of threats of intrusion; as for when
802.11 is mentioned, I think of threats to private life. Furthermore,
how are we going to be able to promote micropayment? I am often
asked if one can safely give one's Blue Card number on Internet.
I must admit that, in some cases, people are right not to do so.
What therefore can be achieved by public action to develop trust?
»
Jean-François
ABRAMATIC :
« Under the word 'trust' I had grouped
several questions on security, the protection of royalties and
the protection of personal data.
It is necessary, above all, to take stock of the situation, see
in which fields technology exists and merely has to be rolled
out, and those where technology is lacking. In the event of a
mere rollout, the question arises as to the funding of a global
and universal rollout of technology, a prerequisite for full trust.
In today's international environment, I feel that no technology
can protect against illicit contents. Research and development
work must therefore be carried out to understand what infrastructure
changes would be necessary. CSTI's work should therefore be oriented
towards mapping the challenges that lie immediately ahead: rollout
in some cases, development in others. »
Robert VERRUE :
« True, the security issue was long
underestimated. It became essential only when people started having
bad experiences. It also became essential with the change in the
nature of transactions, because of their financial aspect or the
confidentiality of files.
Our 'Benchmarking e-Europe' report estimates that 25% of European
users of the Internet have had at least one significant security
problem. In the USA there are between two hundred and fifty to
three hundred secure servers per million inhabitants, but less
than eighty in Europe. Furthermore the present changes are not
leading to any catching up. Lastly, it should be borne in mind
that 80% of disputed bankcard transactions concern the Web.
The security problem is a major brake on the development of Internet
transactions. Surveys conducted among individuals or SMEs and
SMIs show, moreover, that this point is far more significant than
the cost factor.
The European Union has therefore undertaken a whole series of
technological projects to develop secure applications and interoperable
encryption solutions at European level. Without speaking of a
single solution for the whole of the European Union, at least
an interoperable solution must be found to this security problem.
We are working on this, but here again the risk exists of getting
trapped with one technology. I remember that three years ago the
focus of our attention was the digital signature. Today we speak
of the e-signature.
In conclusion it is essential for Europe to address the problem
with interoperable solutions rather than seek solutions based
on a single technology. »
Jean-Marie CADIOU :
« I find the current pessimism about information and
communication technologies rather exaggerated. I am not referring
to the present audience but to the general public in general.
The speculative bubble surrounding the market value of NICT stocks
was as exaggerated as the overly blackened picture we are sometimes
painted.
The European situation is not that bad. A recent study shows that
growth in Europe is slightly better than elsewhere: plus 5% in
2001. Its share in the world market has grown. Telecom services
have for their part grown even slightly faster, around 6%, and
software has gained 8%.
In the longer term, technological changes could alter the way
we interface with the various infrastructure parts mentioned just
now.
Let's take the example of the mobile phone. In two or three years
we will have large size folding screens, highly advanced voice
commands and, lastly, batteries with much higher performances.
This considerable progress in the various infrastructure parts
in mobile phones will probably transform our behaviours.
Another example, this morning we were talking about high speed
Internet, yet terminals capable of making use of it are needed:
watching a film on today's mobiles isn't yet either user-friendly
or satisfactory.
We spoke a lot this morning about trust. This is indeed an extremely
important criterion for the development of e-commerce. We must
also have good business models. If we compare DoCoMo's i-mode
strategy in Japan with those developed in Europe-UMTS licences
and others-it can be seen that some are clearly better than others.
A good business model encourages operators to develop services,
which is always more effective than introducing very high licences
in the first place.
My second point will concern the skills gap, which relates to
the various types of divides. We spoke a great deal this morning
about the geographical divide and, implicitly and explicitly,
about the income divide. A divide which we haven't yet referred
to-and which is particularly important for Europe-is the demographic
divide.
In 2007 in Europe the 55-65 years age band will on average be
larger than the 15-25 years band, even if in France the phenomenon
will occur slightly later. Further, the difference will escalate.
The problem is therefore to keep on board these slightly older
people who have slightly more difficulties than others in accessing
these technologies. Equipment manufacturers will therefore necessarily
have to design their machines with this in mind, all the more
so since the higher age bands generally have a higher purchasing
power.
This leads us to rethink our education model. We are no longer
in the baby-boom period when education, work and retirement followed
each other in a natural sequence. The cycle is now entirely different
with knowledge becoming obsolete every three years, which implies
a new continuing education system.
What's more, some sectors are witnessing a decline in the volume
of skilled labour. We would therefore have to devise a different
model than the present one, delaying the arrival of youths on
the labour market and accelerating the initial education cycle.
I am nevertheless fully aware of the difficulty of implementing
this idea.
I will now refer to the question of European Union enlargement.
On 1 January 2004, Europe will pass from fifteen to twenty-five
members. This very close date is of course giving rise to questions
on the opportunities and risks. Obviously, information and communication
technologies can be a factor accelerating integration. At the
same time, the cohesion funds and structural funds will have to
be used in a way avoiding too high a divide with these new countries.
»
Gérard ROUCAIROL
:
« Our working group concerned research and development,
and more specifically the ways in which the public authorities
support this sector in France. You need to understand that nearly
25% of the French private research and development (R&D) budget
is already devoted to information and communication technologies
(ICTs).
Public and industrial R&D, for its part, is structured around
four main technological networks: telecommunications, software,
audiovisual media and microelectronics. The concept of networks
is based on the delegation to professionals- manufacturers and
public research-of the main orientations and the assessment of
proposals.
After four years of operation it can be considered that this model
has had an extremely mobilising effect on the entire community
formed by public laboratories, SMEs and large groups. Using its
telecommunication networks, France can for instance set up very
high speed experimentation platforms competing with what has been
done in the USA with the Internet 2 programmes and especially
the Abilene network.
If large virtual reality systems called 'immersion caves' are
beginning to become available in France for the aeronautics or
car industry, it's partly thanks to the software network.
This system therefore works. Yet can't we go further? Not only
must we eliminate the sand grains that can jam the mechanism,
we must also be more ambitious.
That's CSTI's determination and what it always proposes: it is
legitimate to believe that France can act as the leader in the
development of new technologies in Europe. To reach this aim our
group has long wished for the creation of a 'single structure'
based on three main subject areas:
- 'Consolidating' existing actions.
It is essential to provide technology networks with the logistic
support allowing them to fulfil their tasks, attract new players,
and extend synergies (between-networks, public/private, large
group/SME, innovations/uses, …), particularly as part of
large multiannual projects.
- 'Optimising' the periods needed to draw up and assess files.
Alain Costes reminded us of the efforts already made in this respect.
The optimisation notion should also apply to the very nature of
R&D aids. In this respect, a very broad consensus is being
reached at the level of large industrial groups and also among
SMEs to say that the present repayable cash advance system is
not the right one to fund R&D. In this field, the only good
model is subsidising.
- 'Extending' its actions.
It is indeed clear that they cannot be optimised within metropolitan
France alone. They obviously need to be extended to European level
and also to the level of international standards organisations.
Such an extension cannot be organised without an ad hoc structure,
which could be the 'single structure' strongly recommended by
CSTI.
I will finish with a word about the funding of R&D. At European
level, in particular, we have seen in the figures announced by
the sixth FRDP some stagnation in ICTs, without any real reason.
In France we have admittedly seen an increase in R&D credits
devoted to ICTs in public laboratories. We have for instance seen
a significant increase in the personnel at GET, INRIA and CNRS.
On the other hand, industrial aid has for its part stagnated and
in a context where, since France Télécom's change
in legal status, the action taken in particular by the DAII (Industrial
and International Affairs Directorate at the Directorate General
of Telecommunications) to inject nearly 2 billion francs into
the industrial sector is no longer to be found in the accounts.
CSTI wishes to recall that one should be attentive to the evolution
of industrial credits and R&D for ICTs, in a context where
the latter are growing in industrialised countries and especially
in the United States. »
Jacques
DUNOGUÉ :
« As you know, Alcatel has been
investing for a long time in practically all the broadband technologies
mentioned today: ADSL, local radio loop, and optical fibres to
connect households.
Broadband is as important for the country's general economy as
it is for that of the telecommunications. I was somewhat surprised
just now to see that the difficulties of our sector were dismissed
summarily. Even if the French players are not the badly off ones-
probably because of the investments and the strategic efforts
made in recent years-you should realise that all these companies
are suffering from the present market conditions. Broadband represents
one of the rare growth hopes for our sector.
One of the underlying problems of the telecommunications sector-operators
or suppliers-is the erosion of traditional voice business owing
to competition and the various technological changes. However,
to date, neither Internet nor another technology have compensated
this shrinking market.
Broadband probably affords the opportunity to really compensate
the erosion suffered by voice business. It will allow us to head
in new directions such as multimedia or interactive television.
Alcatel has been promoting this concept for some time: it's beginning
to become a reality. Most operators are starting to take a very
serious interest in it today. Some already have pre-sales departments,
particularly in Spain or Italy.
Why is it so important? For the past twenty years households have
been spending more and more money on multimedia products or audiovisual
media, and this tendency is growing. When a new games console
is placed on the market people queue up at midnight to buy it!
The leaps and bounds of technology in recent years is today found
in the services offered to households. Yesterday cable, not very
interactive at all, allowed television to be carried. Today ADSL
technology carries interactive multimedia via telephone wires.
To finish this subject of the session, a quick word now on research
and training. It should be remembered that research is taking
place worldwide in integrated hubs-grouping in the same place
public and private laboratories and universities-focusing on a
specific technology.
I could mention the example of the Optics Valley in the Paris
region where the public authorities, university, public research
centres, and large and small manufacturers work together.
In this respect the government has an extremely important role
to play in defining the types of technologies Frances wants to
develop. This helps to clarify the debate, build the necessary
infrastructures and thereby attract investment. We then enter
a virtuous cycle of investment and technology development.
To define these choices, several partners need to sit around the
table. This is a field where public/private partnership is certainly
most efficient. »
Agnès
TOURAINE :
« Technology is spoken about
too often without taking contents into account. CSTI is to be
thanked for having made this an important topic.
Digital technology is profoundly changing the publishing universe.
While, in the past, publishing had no other choice than the paper
medium, its content has now been set free with digital technology
and can be carried on various media like DVDs, Internet, CD-ROMs
or the telephone.
This represents a deep change in publishing production methods,
which has spread moreover to all the sector. This evolution implies
new training for publishing professionals, including for instance
knowledge of data bases and digitising and indexing techniques.
The key factor is of course to have single digitising standards.
In this respect the Open eBook Forum is the International Trade
and Standards Organization for the eBook Industry.
Indexing is also fundamental since it helps to build DTDs that
help to find information. Contrary to what is believed, DTDs cannot
be elaborated by machine. This work must be done by publishers
themselves. The fact, for instance, that Larousse digitised the
entire Larousse contents has saved this company. Four years ago
when Microsoft arrived on the market nobody imagined that an American
specialised in data processing could become the main competitor
of the Larousse or Robert! When Encarta arrived, French publishing
houses were however highly threatened. Thanks to digital technology,
Larousse is today present in fifty countries and probably the
most successful publishing house in France.
Digital technology has therefore deeply changed production methods,
the relation between content and medium and, of course, all the
issues related to royalties.
Another important factor is that previously written contents can
be made use of again. Using this technology they can be grouped
or separated, which, once again, raises serious intellectual property
and royalty questions, but also provides a kind of new creation
meeting needs and services of another kind.
In the education field, all countries worldwide are facing the
same problems. Some answers can be provided using digital technology
and especially what is called remediation, in other words the
capacity to adapt contents to the child's level.
Another example: in Spain seventeen maths books have to be published,
as many as there are regions, to meet the requirements of each
of them. We meet this challenge thanks to digital technology.
This technology is therefore extraordinary in that it allows a
granularisation of publishing which did not previously exist.
It also allows printing on demand. Everyone indeed knows that
printing below three thousand copies of any given work is very
difficult for a publisher. Today however one can publish fifty,
sixty or three hundred copies, which means that book collections
previously doomed, like those from MASPERO, can be printed again.
That said, we should be wary of fantasies of the type: 'teachers
will be replaced by computers'. Being one of the foremost educational
publishers, we are perfectly aware that technologies are at the
service of contents and not the opposite. Everything will not
change overnight simply because schools have high speed Internet;
that wouldn't be desirable any way. Education is above all a question
of teaching skills, of transmitting and elaborating knowledge,
whatever the network and the medium used.
While we obviously need high speed at schools, we need pedagogical
reflection on this new technology.
We must also be wary of the automatic structuring of databases.
You have for example 'path', then 'God' and you obtain: 'all paths
lead to God'. Endless structures and links can always be elaborated,
but DTDs will have to be built with publishing know-how, otherwise
one will get ridiculous absurdities.
We must also be on our guard against the fantasy of a universal
knowledge service which would be carried, free of charge and for
all, on a digital Internet. It should be recalled here that knowledge
stems from authors and these should be paid. Universal access
to free knowledge is an absolute trap that can lead to a State
culture. Creation cannot exist without authors, nor authors without
royalties.
In conclusion I wish to stress the importance of reaching a single
digitising standard to ensure that small publishers, large groups
and the other professionals of the publishing sector can access
and work on the same digital standards.
One of the key points also concerns the partnership between the
public authorities and publishers. Two to three years from now,
the electronic schoolbag, on which Nathan is working, will probably
be entirely different from what it is today. Only joint work between
the public authorities, publishers and pupils will allow the art
of teaching and the technological tool to be combined in the service
of education. Teacher training is of course absolutely essential
in this field.
Lastly, CSTI recommends that micropayment be placed at the heart
of the system. The fact that we have reached this granularity
of knowledge and information indeed implies the possibility of
making payments at very fine levels. Coherent micropayment structures
are absolutely essential.
»
Jean-Jacques DUBY : 
« The question of training and
digital technologies is, to my mind, too often badly addressed.
It's not so much a matter of training in digital technologies
as training in their use. And, just as the best training in research
consists in training through research, training in digital technologies
must be made by actually using them and at all levels, engineers
schools and primary schools alike.
The relations between training and information and communication
technologies got off to a bad start in France. Very early, we
based ourselves on the principle that all kinds of knowledge had
to be learnt before using information technologies. At the beginning
of the 1970s, the maths teaching reform laid down, for instance,
the learning of numeration systems straight away at primary school,
under the pretext that computers communicated in binary language.
You'll agree with me that we didn't have much foresight at the
time!
Similarly, in the 1980s, the teaching of data processing was introduced
in secondary schools on the ground that it was a prerequisite
to the use of computers. More recently, one of CSTI's recommendations
stipulates 'Information technologies at school: a subject to be
taught'. I personally totally disagree with that: if you had to
be familiar with data processing to use a computer, Bill Gates
wouldn't be a multibillionaire!
Almost all professional branches today use digital technologies
and in doing so have changed their very jobs: a banker, tool dresser/trimming
operative, railway signalman, etc., no longer work today like
thirty years ago. In contrast, teachers still work the same way
and the national education authority hasn't changed at all, which
doesn't contribute to the prestige of the French educational system
among children sending SMS messages or playing on Internet with
other children in Australia.
That said, I don't feel this is the main reason why digital technologies
must become an integral part of training. Nor is it for reasons
of productivity gains, which appear illusory to me except in very
special applications. The real challenge is to set an example,
familiarise youths with non-play applications of digital technologies
and achieve genuine training through actually using them.
That's why I agree with CSTI when it says that the key to digitising
French society resides in equipment and training in information
technology as a work tool and teaching medium. And that it is
therefore necessary to invest and train. But I no longer agree
when I read that CSTI recommends 'a massive effort to train teachers.'
When the national education authority speaks of a 'massive effort',
we know what is meant: several million or even several billion
euros. And we know the capacity of the French educational system
to absorb millions of euros without any convincing result. We
need more than an 'effort': a multiannual plan is required with
goals, deadlines and coordinators, like that of banks, for instance,
in the 1970s and 1980s. Nothing short of a change of paradigm
is necessary, and change needs coordinators to be managed correctly.
This also implies going much further than CSTI's recommendation
to 'reward personal investment'. If bankers had had to simply
rely on the 'personal investment' of their wage-earners to introduce
computerisation, their tellers would still be writing with a quill
pen ! »
Jacques STERN :
«
My remarks will address information and communication sciences
as a cultural phenomenon and I'll start with a historic example.
I will then adopt an epistemological approach. Lastly, I will
try and see what challenges they raise for society.
My example is drawn from my speciality, cryptology. At the beginning
of the Second World War the British sought to crack the secret
German codes. To do so they brought together in the suburbs of
London a number of talented scientists including the famous logician
Alan Turing. Their inventiveness, combined with the electromechanical
machines of the time, allowed them to decipher the German messages.
The latter subsequently complicated their codes. Turing then felt
that is was not only necessary to have faster machines but an
instrument genuinely capable of taking logical decisions. He therefore
had the Colossus Mark II built in 1944, a genuine computer way
ahead of its time.
This example illustrates the amazing conceptual feat of data processing
recreating logic by mechanical means and it must remain present
in our minds when we speak today of information sciences and technologies.
Indeed, from an epistemological viewpoint, data processing is
not a vague technique, some modern form of slide rule or table
of logarithms. It's a new field born of the interaction between
thought and matter. At the beginning of data processing, ill-considered
remarks were made about artificial intelligence, purporting that
the machine would do better than man. However, I object to the
idea that data processing is specifically pluridisciplinary and
that you need another discipline to understand it.
One of my colleagues, a former Cambridge chancellor, gave a very
clear explanation of this problem the other day. By taking as
an example a well known-and moreover imaginary science-astrobotany,
he drew a distinction between computational astrobotanics, in
other words the contribution of new tools to traditional astrobotany
and the potential interactions that could mutually fertilise both
disciplines by combining the concepts and methods of data processing
and astrobotany.
This leads me to my third point: society will not perceive the
challenge of information and communication technologies if it
does not understand what the heart of the discipline is.
Nowadays, especially on the Web, research allows the reproduction
in a digital environment of mechanisms-often symbolic-that we
knew how to use without the computer, but that we can now use
differently and better.
Consequently, in tomorrow's virtual agora (and even in today's)
all citizens-as we said this morning-need to understand and master
the operation of data processing systems. Otherwise the digital
divide would widen.
In conclusion, data processing should be present from school onwards
as a fully-fledged discipline and not only as a pluridisciplinary
awakening activity. »
DEBATE
WITH THE PUBLIC
Marc MORONVAL, professor, EIPC :
« The previous remarks have
given me the strong impression of non-maturity or of a deliberate
will to prevent technology from becoming widespread. Everyone
today knows that you don't need to understand the operation of
the combustion engine to drive your car.
The report spoke of the 'Internet school' whereas I expected to
read 'school using Internet' or 'using technology'. I would therefore
have liked to hear about the speakers' vision of the situation,
of the trends and above all of the impacts of the introduction
of information technologies on the role of teachers/learners,
on infrastructures and on the economy in general . »
Agnès TOURAINE :
« You are indeed right in emphasising
that we need to be very careful not to be completely abstruse
when speaking of technologies, especially in the field of education
and contents. That's why CSTI recommends working as often as possible
on open systems and not on proprietary systems.
It is indeed very important to digitise publishers' book collections
on open systems accepted by everyone and that can be carried by
Internet. Today, for instance, CYTALE's Cybook is a proprietary
system, therefore necessarily complex.
Turning to the teachers/learners relationship, many tend to feel
their children are proficient computer users and that, in the
future, teachers will have to change their method as a result.
We, for our part, are absolutely convinced, as an educational
publisher, that the teacher must remain the central figure in
education. The more digitising takes place, the more access there
is to knowledge, the greater the need for interfacing. The teacher's
role must of course evolve, but it would be absurd to believe
that 'a lot of information for a lot of pupils' can work without
their interfacing.
The real future challenge for teachers, publishers and pupils
will therefore be to take up this technology in the educational
setting.
What strikes me most with publishers like Nathan, Bordas, etc.,
is that there is a lot of talk about technology or high speed,
but not enough about pedagogy. Yet the art of teaching is pivotal
to education. New technologies must be at its service and not
the opposite. We must therefore train new teachers in the new
technologies and in their use and bring about a change in their
job entailing their interfacing with these fantastic new contents.
Infrastructures are admittedly important but do not suffice on
their own. There is no point rolling out high speed everywhere
without paying thought to pedagogy, which was the case in the
United States. Other examples can be found in France. When you
see the cost of the project of video satellite transmission to
schools, whereas a Chronopost package has exactly the same result…
This is meaningless without an educational project behind.
The investment will depend on a good partnership between the national
education authority, teachers, publishers, and pupils' parents
in elaborating coherent projects and not shambles. »
Jacques STERN :
« I would like to remark on the combustion
engine example. You learn to drive at a driving school. This learning
is therefore outside the school system, so why can't data processing
also be taught outside it? To my mind, the answer has to be negative.
Continuing with this type of metaphor, you can study how to pilot
a plane. Before flying, you study air lift or drag and try to
understand why a plane can fly. You can of course fly without
knowing all this but, should a critical situation occur, the risk
of a crash will be much higher.
I feel the same applies to data processing. If you don't have
minimum knowledge of how a computer works, you soon run the risk
of encountering difficulties or even using your computer purely
passively like a mere games console. I therefore think that the
place of data processing is at school and that it should be learnt
actively. »
Jean-Jacques DUBY :
« Your question also addressed
the issue from the economic viewpoint. Obviously a change like
that I have just mentioned and that has already taken place at
banks and insurance companies costs a very lot. It involves a
considerable material and human investment.
In the market sector, company managers expected productivity gains
in the 1970s and 80s, which were moreover promised to them by
data processing manufacturers… However, it is known today
that computerisation barely influences productivity: this is the
Solow paradox. This is true if only the quantitative aspects are
considered but, in qualitative terms, a bank today obviously deals
with services and products that are entirely different from its
previous activities.
I therefore feel that the computerisation of the teacher's job
should allow teachers to impart to pupils new knowledge. We still
do not know its precise nature today because it will in fact be
up to teachers to invent it hands-on. »
Jacques DUNOGUÉ :
« I merely wished to contribute
my pragmatic viewpoint as a manufacturer to this very intellectual
debate.
To say, as has been said, that data processing has not entailed
productivity gains is wrong. The energy freed up has been used
in other activities. For instance, Alcatel which previously delivered
its telephone exchanges in six months, does so today in a fortnight.
As to whether the notion of productivity gains can apply to teaching,
we can at the very least ask ourselves if interactivity will not
fundamentally change the teacher/learner relationship. Interactivity
should certainly supply the education authority will the tools
to bring about a positive change in teacher/learner relationships.
I would moreover be curious to know if Vivendi or other bodies
are working on this subject. »
Agnès TOURAINE :
« Il est vrai que nous étudions
le sujet - qui est d'ailleurs plus tabou We were indeed studying
the subject-moreover the most taboo in France-of adapting contents
to levels. This work requires very complicated software systems.
This project must fit into the framework of a curriculum based
on the postulate that 'all should have the same knowledge at the
end of the year.' Yet it must be admitted that children do not
necessarily all have the same learning rhythm or the same comprehension
speed. Many school systems fail to understand this and feel that
all must learn the same thing at the same time.
Discussion is therefore taking place on the possibility-as part
of a curriculum-to adapt the programme to the child's specific
level. As I said previously, this approach is based on complicated
software systems and requires the teacher to adapt his lesson
not to the class as a whole, but to each pupil.
This method also implies previously testing the pupil, not in
terms of potential but in terms of his knowledge level. For example
a pupil who has barely any knowledge of Egypt will receive a different
printed lesson than a pupil already knowledgeable.
Even if the subject is taboo, we cannot hide from ourselves the
fact that the more mass education we have, the less we manage
to educate children. Fewer and fewer children know how to read
and write on starting secondary school. In the name of democracy
we must of course ensure that all have equal chances, but it must
obviously be understood that it is not by teaching the same thing
to everyone and at the same speed that we will reach this goal
. »
Jean-Louis BERNAUDIN, IBM :
« In my company I deal with relations with universities
and grandes écoles.
I wish to return to the metaphor of the combustion engine. I'll
speak here only about what I know about, in other words higher
education. The French model is constituted by professors/researchers
sharing their knowledge with students, with a certain degree of
specialisation.
As far as the teaching of information technologies is concerned,
whether data processing, cryptology or network architecture, specialists
of given subjects are to be found who try to impart their knowledge
to students who absorb it more or less well.
A short while ago I was in front of an audience of Arts et Métiers
(higher school of applied arts and crafts) students in their last
year. These will soon be led to do mechanics in industrial companies.
They are certainly unbeatable on the use of CAD methods at a given
work station with a given software, but none of them had any understanding
of the contributions of these technologies to the supply chain,
in other words to the entire chain of supply and transmission,
step after step, from the manufacturer to the client. Isn't this
what should be taught when we speak of learning to make use of
data processing ? »
Gérard ROUCAIROL :
« You mention the question of the
learning, at engineers schools and in higher education, of the
use of data processing in the automation and computerisation of
companies. There is indeed a real problem in this field: this
teaching is badly done.
When I was young, a higher universities board was tasked with
promoting university professors. It comprised two main sections:
administrative data processing and data processing on its own.
Good researchers entered this latter section and those who were
apparently not as good entered the former. This has had a profound
influence on the French university fabric. Many researchers are
not interested in mechanics and in applying data processing to
optimising company management.
You spoke just now of the supply chain, which indeed supposes
the setting in place of grade computing across the continent,
connecting suppliers and partners. These concepts are poorly mastered
by French researchers and professors at engineers schools and
also at universities.
Also, technology is spoken about a lot but nobody should forget,
not even manufacturers, that science is behind technology. Those
who took a scientific course certainly remember they had to solve
integrals. And these serve to modelise combustion engines. Having
learnt to calculate them is not, to my knowledge, a handicap in
using a car… »
Jean-Marie CADIOU :
« I agree in saying that a scientific
basis is behind all these technologies, but the real problems
arise rather in their use. Europe is lagging behind as regards
its liking for these technologies and the more you lead people
to believe that their use requires arid and complicated know-how,
the more you will frighten them.
You should realise that the average length of time that knowledge
remains valid is now approximately three years. Therefore, whatever
the degree of initial training, knowledge very soon becomes almost
obsolete.
In my student days, data processing was unheard of. Then I worked
at IBM where our OS/360 manuals formed a pile several metres high.
Even today the manual on my mobile is fatter than the mobile itself,
but anyway I don't consult it: if I have a problem I just call
someone for advice.
I have nothing against the creation of an Internet school, but
while people are being trained to teach there, Internet will already
have changed a great deal. We therefore need a dynamic vision
of the issue, distinguishing very carefully general use (where
a large part of the market is situated) from professional uses.
As regards professional uses, companies will have to organise
retraining courses with perhaps personal investment on the part
of staff.
Increasingly older people must be given the opportunity to use
these technologies, overcoming any mental block, in all environments
where they will have to use them, both at home and at work.
The public authorities certainly have a responsibility to take
in this field, but companies and individuals must also participate
actively here. The investment will certainly be high, but you
shouldn't believe that spending a lot of money is sufficient to
solve the problem. »
Jacques STERN :
« We are reviewing here a set of
very different questions: training in data processing and in communication
sciences; the use of data processing in teaching or training engineers
in data processing applications.
I agree with you: this matter must be dealt with vertically and
we must study data processing at all levels where it intervenes.
However, if we forget the conceptual base, we will finish up with
situations like that I've already seen where, to produce a management
software, old pieces written in COBOL were used whereas in the
meanwhile research work had introduced object-oriented programming.
Doing without the conceptual base would therefore lead us to subsequent
technological problems . »
Jacques DUNOGUÉ :
« We indeed know how being simple
can be particularly complicated. Admittedly, interactivity brings
a new dimension to the Internet as we know it today. In particular
it is going to lead to distinguishing two types of use.
On the one hand there will be interactive users of the network
and, on the other, leisure users 'in their armchair', probably
more numerous in the future. The effort the latter make must be
minimal, even if the service itself is very sophisticated. For
example, the maximum effort in front of a TV set is to zap. Interactivity
will be a success if the growing number of services can be accessed
with the same ease of use. Also, when we speak of pay-per-view
television, we transpose it too often to today's Internet uses
by thinking about access to image banks, films, etc… I would
tend to think that the most popular uses will concern other services
just as much, such as playback television: watching the news at
the time that suits you or watching a soap ahead of its scheduled
time the following day. Other services, other solutions.
However that may be, as manufacturers, our role is clearly to
use the most sophisticated technologies to provide simple to use
services. Success depends on that ? »
Christian SCHACH, chargé d'affaires,
French secretariat Eurêka:
« My question concerns online teaching.
I remember having read an article on the budgets the United States
devotes to R&D. With high speed and interactivity, videoconferencing
should be of far higher quality, which will open up the possibility
of 'attending' or going back over a lecture whenever you like.
What is CSTI's approach to online teaching and its present possibilities?
»
Agnès TOURAINE :
« Online teaching covers several
issues. As you know, Harvard placed its lectures on line free
of charge. Some professors then filed a suit for royalties.
At university level, the question arises differently since the
two teaching media are not interchangeable: online teaching is
not intended to replace lectures professors give to an audience
of students. The two media are on the contrary complementary.
Six hundred American websites concern the university field, because
in the United States each book has its web companion. Teaching
uses more and more supporting companions. You have, for instance,
a book, a web companion for the student and another for the professor.
The second stage, far more complicated, would be pure e-training,
in other words training completely from home. Everyone is today
seeking the right e-training system. This idea was all the rage
a while ago but now it's no longer in vogue. For the time being
nothing really conclusive has been achieved in the field. Publishers
worldwide are working on the idea but, repeating myself, online
teaching needs to be combined with tutoring.
It's probably a promising solution, but I don't know today of
any example of e-training that works perfectly well .»
Jean-Jacques DUBY :
« It should be remembered that the basis of pedagogy was
defined remarkably briefly by Benoît de Nurcie-better known
as Saint Benoît-in the year 540. The illustrious author
of St Benedict's Rule tells us: 'He who knows, speaks and teaches;
he who does not know, remains silent, listens and learns.' That
is still the basis of modern pedagogy. A rule that remains valid
for one thousand five hundred years really is extremely astute
and it must be difficult to do better!
The older and the more widespread a technology is, the more difficult
it is to replace. E-training is of interest in that it allows
people to be taught who cannot leave home. As Mme Touraine said,
tutoring nevertheless remains essential in this respect. We must
therefore pinpoint e-education's strong point, apart from the
fact that not all students have to go to their courses at the
same time or else the fact that everyone can learn at his own
rhythm. Some techniques also allow the pupil to navigate in a
lesson on the basis of what he already knows or by checking his
knowledge progressively.
Several additional educational offers therefore exist today, but
all this is difficult and moreover very expensive. »
Jonathan ROBIN, Internet Society,
Unesco-OECD liaison :
« On both sides of the assembly,
we have so far mentioned the impact of digitising on publishing
and education in the broad sense of the term.
Digitising is part of a historic change in the way we access knowledge.
However, work for instance by IRCAM and in the context of the
new Internet architecture Ipv6-which instead of interconnecting
computers will literally and figuratively serve as an interface
between uses and users-may revolutionise the traditional paradigms
of biological and societal contexts.
How does CSTI envisage raising the public and private players'
awareness of these new challenges? »
Serge HIREL, journalist :
« I would like to refer to the issue
of creation and royalties. Mme Touraine said just now, 'Creation
cannot exist without authors, nor authors without royalties.'
I'd like to add: 'no rights without remuneration.'
Among group B's recommendation we find that, to facilitate the
streaming of audiovisual material, it would be necessary for Internet
streaming rights to be deemed acquired once the rights to exploit
audiovisual rights have been assigned. However most communication
groups are today seeking to create a new market, that of Internet
rights. Isn't there a contradiction between these two viewpoints?
»
Agnès TOURAINE :
« As you know, the main difference
between our law and copyright, for instance, is that in the latter
all rights are deemed acquired. We must above all not militate
in favour of an extension of this Anglo-Saxon system.
The problem in France is that between moral rights and royalties,
it is very difficult to create new rights, particularly in the
digital field. Further, it is difficult for us to explain to some
digital authors that we cannot pay the same royalties for all
media.
An educational CD-ROM will contain for example music, video and
text. You cannot pay SACEM for this music at the same rate as
when you buy a CD containing only music. In France we have reached
absurd situations where in some projects 95% of the selling price
is made up of royalties.
Royalties must of course be protected, but must be renegotiated
depending on the media. CSTI has made some recommendations but
everyone knows that the subject is giving rise to many discussions
in France and worldwide. We feel that this creation of new rights
must thoroughly comply with royalties without the latter being
an obstacle. We must also be sure, when faced with multiple royalty
digital works, that the cost is not the sum of the royalties of
each single work.
As you know, a recent report attempted to challenge the notion
of collective works. Imagine what this notion implies when eight
hundred people contribute for instance to an encyclopaedia! Challenging
the collective work notion would require negotiating with these
eight hundred people, a few hundred of whom often have family
beneficiaries!
As a result some prefer to produce elsewhere. We shouldn't reach
a situation in France where excessive protection leads to the
relocation of intellectual production. We therefore absolutely
must simplify the regulations on royalties. In a nutshell, the
author creates and the beneficiaries 'collect the dough', and
I assure you there is sometimes nothing worse than negotiating
with some of the latter!
This is therefore a complex issue requiring very complicated negotiations,
but I feel sure we will find a solution in France and at European
level. »
Jacques DUNOGUÉ :
« I feel that the companies collecting
these royalties should take a bit more interest in modern methods
and reduce their costs. Internet losses of the present system
are very high and I'm not sure that royalties are finally paid
to the entitled parties. One day we will have to address this
issue. The same instruments that are tasked with protecting Internet
rights will also help to invoice them more easily and more precisely.
»
SYNTHESIS
OF THE TALKS
Didier LOMBARD :
« I would simply like to recall the broad lines of the
debates which are soon going to be over for today.
I have noted a strong momentum in line with CSTI's guidelines,
even if slight differences may of course exist between different
viewpoints. I could summarise them as follows:
- Don't make networks if you don't know what content to put in
them.
- Everyone must take his driving test, but it is perhaps not necessary
beforehand to know how to disassemble the engine.
I also heard many other remarks of the same type this morning.
I think that today CSTI really has started its work. The aim was
indeed to interact with society, even if we previously had to
work in a closed circuit. Our doors are now wider open than before.
Today's debates will be printed as proceedings and distributed
to everyone. We will pursue our work by going deeper into a certain
number of topics. Whoever wishes to make a contribution will be
welcome.
Our aim is to keep an active advisory role so that our conclusions
then enter the decisional process. One of our credos is that any
decision taken in our field, particularly as regards networks
and the development of services, implies bringing in all the local
authorities in an operating method perhaps more flexible than
today's. We certainly have some progress to make here.
We are all working for our country to be the best possible and
we today see enough enthusiasm to achieve this goal. We will continue
to organise this type of talks as our work advances. »
