CITIZENS’ SECURITY NOT AS SIMPLE AS = 2 Olivier PAUL-MORANDINI Founder EENA

Emergency Telecommunications Citizen Sirens Radio, TV, GSMs Specific Networks Between Authorities

EENA’s objective Promote the knowledge and efficient use of the 112 all over Europe, by acting as a discussion platform bringing together all the actors (organizations, enterprises and individuals) involved with the development and implementation of the 112.

EENA believes in the following principles Knowledge of the 112 is a fundamental right – it can save lives. Calling the 112 should result to the appropriate help, as soon as possible, at the place of the emergency. Right to the same high quality safety and security standards within the EU. Right to the same medical treatment in case of accident or disaster.

Annual emergency calls Within the EU, 80 to 100 million emergency calls Of which 40 million on mobile phones –Of which 3,5 million bad location information  loss of time –Of which 2,5 million without location information  cannot sent help Concerning 100 million of Europeans travelling every year within EU !!! Source CGALIES

In 2004 the EENA –Introduced Complaints to the EC against 7 MS –Submitted contributions for The discussion on Services of General Interest ETSI’s EMTEL group –Went to the European Ombudsman against the Commission for maladministration on the 112 2/3 of EENA recommendations recognized Achievements

In 2004 –Information campaign amongst MEP and new Commissioners –Second European 112 conference and exhibition without co-financing (200 representatives from 28 countries) In 2005 –As suggested by both ETSI and EC, EENA is launching 2 independant Committees already working on the part « telecommunications between Citizen and Authorities »

Time loss ? Minority of emergencies requires intervention for only health care services –Manage traffic jam (police) –Need to save people before being taken care of by doctors (fire fighters-ambulance)  Time gained thanks to interoperability especially by implementing caller location one time rather than 3, once for each service  If separate call takers, the same service is paid 3 times The COST: probably one of the best-kept secret after identity of JFK murderer. At the first CGALIES meeting such a survey on 112 platforms and linked services costs had been already asked and a special group worked on it for more than 2 years…top secret classified ?

Lack of dispatchers with special education MS’s with unified call centres –Have an efficient 112 service and –Provide full educational programmes for the operators (ex 52 weeks education program with internship and exam in Finland or 85 in Sweden) What is the educationnal programme for MS’s with separate call ?

Vulnerability of a single system With a single system by region, it can be used as a back-up for the neighbouring region If you invest in one system you get one back-up (so 2 systems) and can get then the highest technology instead of having 3 systems for which you will pay 3 times when need to upload the technology

And about the Citizen All those points in the negative balance are not taking into account the Citizen point of view… Do you think he will prefer to remember three different numbers for each MS instead of the 112 for all types of emergency in Europe? Why so many countries implemented a single emergency call number? For example in France do all the health care services operators have followed a complete education program ? Do they provide multilingual response ? Do they provide accurate caller location ? Effort should be on «how to work better together» instead of «how to get our own new number»

Not informing the Citizen Many MS’s did not inform the mobile Citizen about the 112 as the number to dial when in distress within EU –Either because those MS’s supposed their citizens know all the different emergency call numbers for each country –Or MS’s penalize the Citizen by not giving him access to a number that can save lives

Conclusions: Quality criteria Till the day we do not get quality standards and a complete evaluation of the all 112 chain, everybody can say what he wants Hesculaep could strongly recommend those quality criteria and a methodology for the complete evaluation from a medical point of view. This methodology already exists regarding the launch of the call (Portugal 2003) Many countries went into the 112/911 direction (USA, Canada, Nederlands, Portugal, Spain, Luxembourg, Sweden, Finland…) and some more are going now. WHY ? Do those countries consider of getting a supplementary number ?

Conclusions I will keep my doubts till the day this evaluation is not became an obligation (and this position is at least supported by Portugal where they had courrage to be evaluated). There is a need to evaluate the all 112 chain till the victime goes out the hospital I can observe some corporatism and I can understand it BUT today it is time to work all together and to refocus the debate on the Citizen’s interest which is far away now

Contact the EENA Web: Post: EENA Chaussée de Saint-Job, 622 B-1180 Brussels BELGIUM Fax: +32 (0)