Translation of "Ligne d'appel privilégié du pupitre opérateur " (French → English) :

32. Recommends, with a view to improving the efficiency of the 112 emergency service in the EU, the establishment of an action programme to support experience sharing and exchange of best practices between the NRAs, emergency services and civil society organisations in the Member States, extending this exchange to organisations in EU candidate and neighbouring countries; suggests that, to this end, a network of experts could be set up; recommends specifically the exchange of best practices between Member States as regards the handling of 112 calls, in particular on operator training, the use of a single ...[+++] operator to handle a call and the use of online and interpretation services that could help those who do not speak the language of the country in which they are using the emergency services;

Hotline operators receive training on procedural rules and how to respond to calls, coping with the caller's emotions such as anger and panic.

Further closures were made following the publication of a reference unbundling offer (enabling alternative providers to use the incumbent’s access lines to offer services to customers) in Malta, the full provision of the Single European Emergency number 112 in Poland and the publication of a comprehensive subscribers’ directory in Lithuania.

Further two cases concern incomplete transposition into national law of the mechanism (also called Article 7 procedure, see MEMO/06/59) for notifying the Commission of draft decisions following analysis of competition in the various electronic communications markets in Latvia, and the incompleteness of the incumbent’s reference offer to other operators allowing them to connect their own equipment to users’ lines (called unbundling) in the local exchange in Estonia.

Likewise, retail revenues, call minutes or numbers of fixed telephone lines or subscribers of public telephone network operators are possible criteria for measuring the market shares of undertakings operating in these markets(82).

These are, of course, the budgetary question, the question of a supposedly excessive fragmentation or disintegration of the Union’s actions, which is considered likely to reduce its visibility and, as a result, the question of an option in the sense of there being privileged lines which would support initiatives of a greater scale and of a more spectacular kind. The participation of agents and operators had been foreseen for this, which would involve a greater number of countries as a minimum which, as we see it, would carry a serious risk of hypertrophy in some networks of cultural operators. This would give them an excessive concentrat ...[+++]ion of means and powers and, as a result, threaten the normal functioning and even the very existence of many others.