The European Parliament's ITRE committee on 24 June 2026 held a public hearing on the Digital Networks Act (DNA), where experts and regulators staked out competing positions on the balance between harmonisation, simplification, and national flexibility. Berec Chair Marko Mišmaš urged an 'evolution, not revolution' approach, warning that the proposed single passport and harmonised wholesale access products risk rigidity and over-centralisation; he advocated preserving national regulatory authority and using common guidance rather than prescriptive EU rules. Academic Alexandre de Streel framed the DNA as a 'double helix' of sovereignty and competitiveness, supporting longer spectrum licences but cautioning against centralising power in the Commission, especially for local fixed networks; he called for cost-compensation mechanisms for mandated copper switch-off and high-risk vendor removal. Professor Anna Pisarkiewicz argued the DNA must address asymmetric burdens between operators and large content platforms, proposing a cumulative burden test to eliminate duplicative sector-specific rules where horizontal laws (GDPR, DSA) already apply; she urged a nuanced net neutrality review distinguishing fixed and mobile networks. Competition expert Peter Alexiadis criticised the DNA as 'disjointed', warning that liberalising mergers while reducing access regulation is contradictory; he stressed that harmonisation does not create European markets and that security provisions should not be used to block access obligations. Divergences emerged over centralisation: Berec and de Streel pushed back against Commission power, while Pisarkiewicz saw a stronger EU mandate for external spectrum coordination as strategic. Next steps: MEPs will consider amendments as the file progresses through co-decision. Affected stakeholders include telecom operators, NRAs, content providers, and consumers.
Source▶ Watch debate ↗
EU Matrix analysis