A view from Brussels: How serious is the EU about competitiveness?

Concepts of competitiveness, cutting red-tape and hitting the regulatory pause button resurface every so often in Brussels. Some might say these are buzzwords that play well as EU leaders rotate. This has played out time and time again in the European capital and yet, this time, they could be a bit more than buzzwords.

The resonance of the report on EU competitiveness led by former Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi has been surprisingly lasting. Originally, it might have been seen as yet another dust collector. After all, these reports tend to have a short shelf life.

Since its release in September, the report regularly supports the — largely pre-planned — agenda of President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, such as the Competitiveness Compass, an initiative meant to be the Commission's "economic doctrine for the next five years," as Executive Vice-President for Prosperity and Industrial Strategy Stéphane Séjourné said. Its first tranche is tied to the green agenda. Rumor has it the initiative will also address data protection law, though only to limit some reporting and documentation requirements under the EU General Data Protection Regulation.

The breadth and impact of such an initiative has yet to be specified. There are a few indicators to watch to gauge how serious the Commission might be about its ambitions.

The prior mandate led to adoption of a large number of policy instruments — building up the famous blue wall of Brussels, though not every organization will be subject to every brick of it. The wall got a lot higher and thicker over the past few years. The pendulum swung far in the regulatory direction and, now, it might be swinging in the other direction, mixing rules of both physics and politics.

The impact of this legislative wave is also being felt very strongly not only by industry, but by policymakers and regulators themselves. They are being asked to keep up with the much-needed guidance, structuring and upskilling of the ecosystem. The EU Artificial Intelligence Office has yet literally dozens of deliverables to produce stemming from the AI Act, and the European Data Protection Board is still developing guidance on the interplay of the GDPR and the Digital Markets Act, a regulation that entered into force more than two years ago.

Last but not least, the Commission is keeping its ears open for what others say about competitiveness — internally and externally. Of course, it is looking at its American friends and the assertive rhetoric displayed on all fronts. It is also mindful that, to date, six member states have a right-wing government, with several more leaning toward very conservative coalitions. Competitiveness and deregulation agendas may resonate more strongly than ever around the old continent.

Elsewhere, the first AI Act obligations became applicable 2 Feb. Providers and deployers of AI systems in scope must now ensure their staff and anyone using AI systems on their behalf have a sufficient level of AI literacy. The AI Office published a living repository containing a nonexhaustive list of AI literacy practices used by some signatories of the AI Pact pledge. This repository is of an educational nature, since implementing the listed practices does not automatically guarantee compliance with the AI literacy obligation under the AI Act.

National data protection authorities, such as the Dutch and German DPAs, have also offered some guidance on this topic. The Commission has also published draft guidelines on prohibited AI practices, as defined by the AI Act, to facilitate compliance with another obligation that has become applicable as of last Sunday — the AI Act's prohibitions on unacceptable risk AI.

Isabelle Roccia, CIPP/E, is the managing director, Europe, for the IAPP.