Member States see the EC’s attempts to reduce fragmentation as having the potential to undermine their national autonomy
Member States are wary of potential reductions in national autonomy in the pursuit of greater harmonisation
On 22 May 2026, the Cypriot Presidency of the Council of the EU issued a progress report on the EC’s proposed Digital Networks Act (DNA) to the Council’s General Secretariat, who then sent it to the Council’s national ministers on 2 June 2026 for its consideration. The report focuses on the draft DNA’s state of play in the Council, as explained by the Working Party on Telecommunications and Information Society (WP TELECOM), but also briefly highlights its progress in the European Parliament. The Parliament’s Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) is leading internal negotiations on the DNA, with Michał Kobosko (MEP, Renew Europe) its Rapporteur. In the Council, the Working Party has been examining the DNA proposal, with the EC presenting to it on key measures such as the fibre transition, pan-European satellite services, Single Passporting, spectrum, resilience and the roles of BEREC, the Office for Digital Networks (ODN) and the Radio Spectrum Policy Board (RSPB). The Presidency explains that while Member States broadly support the EC’s proposals, they are concerned about EU-level harmonisation restricting national autonomy, which has been one of the most common concerns about the DNA.
The Council is concerned by the EC’s potential use of implementing acts to uphold open internet rules
The Working Party’s review to date has found that Member States are cautious of an over-reliance on EC implementing acts, particularly on net neutrality, which Member States consider could put the core principles of the Open Internet Regulation (OIR) at risk. The EC has proposed the deletion of 18 of the OIR’s 19 recitals, instead transposing most of its principles into the DNA. The Working Party also found that some Member States questioned the added value of the newly proposed “voluntary conciliation mechanism for ecosystem cooperation”, which would establish a mechanism for dispute resolution between telecoms operators and firms in adjacent sectors, including content and application providers (CAPs). While the report does not give further detail as to why some Member States hold these concerns, they may fear that it opens a backdoor to network fees. However, it seems unlikely that voluntary conciliation alone would lead to any serious revival of the “fair share” debate.
Single Passporting has come under fire, with Member States warning it may be an example of unnecessary centralisation
The EC’s proposed Single Passporting regime, which would enable operators to register in one Member State, but operate across the bloc, has been criticised in the Council. The Working Party reports that Member States are concerned about:
The Single Passport framework’s design and practical operation;
The risk of additional administrative complexity;
Potential legal uncertainty and possible regulatory forum shopping from operators; and
How supervisory and enforcement responsibilities over operators would be allocated between Member States.
The Working Party states that this is another part of the DNA where the Council wants to avoid unnecessary centralisation and preserve national regulatory autonomy. In addition to being considered by the Council, the progress report was discussed at the Transport, Telecommunications and Energy (TTE) Council’s meeting on 9 June 2026. The Council of the EU will continue to prepare its common position on the DNA proposal based on the Working Party’s examination, enabling it to enter trilogue negotiations with the EC and Parliament.
