Let's go back to 1957. Representatives from six European countries had come to Rome to sign the treaty that was to create the European Union. Europe was destroyed. A world war had emerged from Europe. The human suffering was unbelievable and unprecedented. Those men wanted to create a peaceful, democratic Europe, a Europe that works for its people.
讓我們一起回到 1957 年。 來自六個歐洲國家的代表 來到了羅馬, 簽訂了創立歐盟的條約。 歐洲被毀掉了。 世界大戰在歐洲爆發。 人類受到的苦難是難以置信的、 史無前例的。 那些人 想要創造一個和平、 民主的歐洲, 一個為人民服務的歐洲。
And one of the many building blocks in that peace project was a common European market. Already back then, they saw how markets, when left to themselves, can sort of slip into being just the private property of big businesses and cartels, meeting the needs of some businesses and not the needs of customers.
這個和平計畫的 許多組成元素之中, 其中一個就是歐洲共同市場。 在當時, 他們就已經明白, 市場如果被放任不管, 就會造成私人企業的 市場壟斷與聯合壟斷行為。 它們只想滿足某些企業的需求, 而非消費者的需求。
So from our very first day, in 1957, the European Union had rules to defend fair competition. And that means competition on the merits, that you compete on the quality of your products, the prices you can offer, the services, the innovation that you produce. That's competition on the merits. You have a fair chance of making it on such a market. And it's my job, as Commissioner for Competition, to make sure that companies who do business in Europe live by those rules.
所以,打從第一天起, 在 1957 年, 歐盟就訂定了一些規則 用來保護市場的公平競爭, 也就是良性競爭, 你要靠你的產品品質、 提供的價格、 服務、創新來競爭。 這樣才是良性競爭。 在這樣的市場上, 你才有公平的成功機會。 而身為歐盟 競爭委員會的委員長, 我的工作是 確保在歐洲做生意的公司 能因為這些規則, 可以安心地做生意。
But let's take a step back. Why do we need rules on competition at all? Why not just let businesses compete? Isn't that also the best for us if they compete freely, since more competition drives more quality, lower prices, more innovation? Well, mostly it is. But the problem is that sometimes, for businesses, competition can be inconvenient, because competition means that the race is never over, the game is never won. No matter how well you were doing in the past, there's always someone who are out there wanting to take your place. So the temptation to avoid competition is powerful. It's rooted in motives as old as Adam and Eve: in greed for yet more money, in fear of losing your position in the market and all the benefits it brings.
但,讓我們先退一步想想。 為什麼競爭還需要定規則? 為什麼不放任企業去競爭就好了? 如果它們能自由競爭, 對我們不是最好的嗎? 畢竟,越多競爭 會帶動更好的品質、 更低的價格、更多的創新,不是嗎? 嗯,大致上來說是沒錯。 問題是,有時候,對企業來說, 競爭會帶來不方便, 因為競爭意味著, 賽跑永遠不會結束, 永遠沒有比賽贏家。 不論你在過去做得多好, 總有某個人 等著要取代你的位置。 所以,規避競爭的誘惑 是很強大的。 它深根在與亞當夏娃 一樣古老的動機裡面: 這些動機包括:對錢的貪婪、 怕失去在市場上地位的恐懼感、 還有它帶來的所有利益。
And when greed and fear are linked to power, you have a dangerous mix. We see that in political life. In part of the world, the mix of greed and fear means that those who get power become reluctant to give it back. One of the many things I like and admire in our democracies are the norms that make our leaders hand over power when voters tell them to. And competition rules can do a similar thing in the market, making sure that greed and fear doesn't overcome fairness. Because those rules mean that companies cannot misuse their power to undermine competition.
當貪婪和恐懼 跟權力連結在一起, 就是一種很危險的組合。 我們在政治生態中可以看到這點。 在世界的某些地區, 貪婪和恐懼的結合 意味著取得權力的人 會不願意把權力交回。 而民主, 讓我很喜歡和欣賞的其中一點 就是規範, 當投票者要求我們的領袖 把權力交出來時, 他們就必須要交出來。 在市場上,競爭規則 也有類似的作用, 它能確保貪婪和恐懼不會戰勝公平。 因為那些規則意味著 公司無法濫用它們的 權力來破壞競爭。
Think for a moment about your car. It has thousands of parts, from the foam that makes the seats to the electrical wiring to the light bulbs. And for many of those parts, the world's carmakers, they are dependent on only a few suppliers. So it's hardly surprising that it is kind of tempting for those suppliers to come together and fix prices. But just imagine what that could do to the final price of your new car in the market. Except, it's not imaginary. The European Commission has dealt with already seven different car parts cartels, and we're still investigating some. Here, the Department of Justice are also looking into the market for car parts, and it has called it the biggest criminal investigation it has ever pursued. But without competition rules, there would be no investigation, and there would be nothing to stop this collusion from happening and the prices of your car to go up.
試想你的汽車 有數以千計的零件, 從做椅子用的泡沫材料, 到電力線路,到燈泡都是。 很多零件的提供, 世界上的汽車製造商 只能仰賴少數的供應商。 所以,並不意外 會有某種誘因 讓那些供應商想要聯合定價。 但,想像一下,這對市場上 新車的最終價格會有什麼樣的影響。 此外,這並非想像出來的。 歐盟執行委員會 已經處理過七件不同的 汽車零件企業聯合壟斷行為, 還有一些案件仍在調查中。 而這裡的司法部 也在調查汽車零件的市場, 而司法部說這是它們所進行過 最大的犯罪調查。 但若沒有競爭規則, 就不會有調查, 就沒有什麼能夠阻止共謀的發生, 而你的汽車價格就會上漲。
Yet it's not only companies who can undermine fair competition. Governments can do it, too. And governments do that when they hand out subsidies to just the favorite few, the selected. They may do that when they hand out subsidies -- and, of course, all financed by taxpayers -- to companies. That may be in the form of special tax treatments, like the tax benefits that firms like Fiat, Starbucks and Apple got from some governments in Europe. Those subsidies stop companies from competing on equal terms. They can mean that the companies that succeed, well, they are the companies that got the most subsidy, the ones that are the best-connected, and not, as it should be, the companies that serve consumers the best. So there are times when we need to step in to make sure that competition works the way it should. By doing that, we help the market to work fairly, because competition gives consumers the power to demand a fair deal. It means that companies know that if they cannot offer good prices or the service that's expected, well, the customers will go somewhere else.
但,不只是公司 會破壞競爭。 政府也會。 政府分發補助金給 少數幾個他們喜歡的對象。 他們發補助金的行為 就是一種不公平的競爭, 當然,這些錢全都是由我們 納稅人及公司買單。 採用的形式可能是 特別的課稅方式, 比如稅率優惠, 像飛雅特、星巴克、蘋果這些 公司,都有從歐洲的一些政府 得到類似這樣的利益。 那些補助,阻礙了公司之間的公平競爭。 也就是說:成功的公司 會拿走大部分的補助款, 或是擁有最好關係的公司拿走, 而不是,雖然應該 是由提供消費者 最佳服務的公司獲得補助。 所以有時候需要我們介入, 來確保競爭都是依照 應該的方式來運作。 透過這麼做,我們能 協助市場公平運作, 因為競爭給予消費者 要求公平交易的權力。 那意味著,公司知道如果 它們無法提供好的價格 或是預期的服務, 那麼,消費者就會去找別家公司。
And that sort of fairness is more important than we may sometimes realize. Very few people think about politics all the time. Some even skip it at election time. But we are all in the market. Every day, we are in the market. And we don't want businesses to agree on prices in the back office. We don't want them to divide the market between them. We don't want one big company just to shut out competitors from ever showing us what they can do.
那種公平性的重要程度, 比我們所了解的還要高。 很少人會隨時都在想政治。 有些人甚至在選舉時都不會去投票。 但我們都在市場裡。 每天,我們都在市場裡。 我們並不想要企業在背後 對價格上下其手。 我們不想要它們彼此間瓜分市場。 我們不想要一家大公司 把其它競爭者擋在門外, 讓我們看不見後者能做什麼。
If that happens, well, obviously, we feel that someone has cheated us, that we are being ignored or taken for granted by the market. And that may undermine not only our trust in the market but also our trust in the society. In a recent survey, more than two-thirds of Europeans said that they had felt the effects of lack of competition: that the price for electricity was too high, that the price for the medicines they needed was too high, that they had no real choice if they wanted to travel by bus or by plane, or they got poor service from their internet provider. In short, they found that the market didn't treat them fairly. And that might seem like very small things, but they can give you this sense that the world isn't really fair. And they see the market, which was supposed to serve everyone, become more like the private property of a few powerful companies.
如果那種情況發生了, 很明顯地,我們會覺得 有人欺騙了我們, 我們被忽視了、或是被市場予取予求。 那可能會破壞我們對市場的信任、 也會破壞我們對社會的信任。 在一項近期的調查中, 超過三分之二的歐洲人 說他們感受到了 缺乏競爭所造成的效應: 電價太貴, 他們所需之藥品的價格太高, 他們沒有辦法選擇 要坐巴士或是飛機旅行, 或是網際網路提供者 提供給他們的服務很糟。 簡言之,他們發現, 市場並沒有公平對待他們。 那可能看起來只是件小事, 但這些小事會讓你覺得 世界其實並不公平。 市場本來應該是要服務 每個人的,但他們卻看到市場 變成更像是少數 強大公司的私人財產。
The market is not the society. Our societies are, of course, much, much more than the market. But lack of trust in the market can rub off on society so we lose trust in our society as well. And it may be the most important thing we have, trust. We can trust each other if we are treated as equals. If we are all to have the same chances, well, we all have to follow the same fundamental rules. Of course, some people and some businesses are more successful than others, but we do not trust in a society if the prizes are handed out even before the contest begins.
市場並不是社會。 當然,我們的社會遠遠超過市場。 但缺乏對市場的信任, 可能會對社會產生影響, 所以我們也會失去對社會的信任。 而我們所擁有的東西當中, 最重要的可能就是信任。 如果我們被平等對待, 我們就能信任彼此。 如果我們都有同樣的機會, 我們都得要遵循同樣的根本規則, 當然,有些人或企業比 其他人或企業更成功, 但如果獎品在比賽開始之前 就已經先給出去的話, 我們是不可能會相信這個社會的。
And this is where competition rules come in, because when we make sure that markets work fairly, then businesses compete on the merits, and that helps to build the trust that we need as citizens to feel comfortable and in control, and the trust that allows our society to work. Because without trust, everything becomes harder. Just to live our daily lives, we need to trust in strangers, to trust the banks who keep our money, the builders who build our home, the electrician who comes to fix the wiring, the doctor who treats us when we're ill, not to mention the other drivers on the road, and everyone knows that they are crazy. And yet, we have to trust them to do the right thing. And the thing is that the more our societies grow, the more important trust becomes and the harder it is to build. And that is a paradox of modern societies. And this is especially true when technology changes the way that we interact. Of course, to some degree, technology can help us to build trust in one another with ratings systems and other systems that enable the sharing economy. But technology also creates completely new challenges when they ask us not to trust in other people but to trust in algorithms and computers.
這就是需要競爭規則的原因了, 因為當我們能確保市場公平運作, 那麼企業之間就能良性競爭, 那就能夠協助建立信任, 我們公民需要這種信任 才能感到到社會是舒服且有秩序的, 這種信任也會讓 我們的社會能夠運作。 因為,若沒有信任, 一切都會變得比較困難。 光是日常生活, 我們就需要信任陌生人, 信任我們存款的銀行, 信任建造我們房子的建商, 信任來家裡修電路的電工, 信任我們生病時治療我們的醫生, 更不用說信任路上的其他駕駛人, 人人都知道他們是很瘋狂的。 但,我們得要信任他們, 信任他們會做對的事。 重點是,我們的社會越是成長, 信任就變得越重要, 但也越難去建立信任。 那就是現代社會的矛盾。 當科技改變了我們互動的方式時, 這點就更是重要。 當然,某種程度上, 科技可以協助我們, 用實現共享經濟的 評分系統和其它系統 來建立彼此的信任。 但科技也創造出全新的挑戰, 科技要求我們不要信任其他人, 而要信任演算法和電腦。
Of course, we all see and share and appreciate all the good that new technology can do us. It's a lot of good. Autonomous cars can give people with disabilities new independence. It can save us all time, and it can make a much, much better use of resources. Algorithms that rely on crunching enormous amounts of data can enable our doctors to give us a much better treatment, and many other things. But no one is going to hand over their medical data or step into a car that's driven by an algorithm unless they trust the companies that they are dealing with. And that trust isn't always there. Today, for example, less than a quarter of Europeans trust online businesses to protect their personal information.
當然,我們都能看見、共享、感激 新科技帶給我們的所有好處。 好處有很多。 自動駕駛汽車能讓殘疾者 有新的獨立性。 科技能幫我們省下時間, 科技能把資源做更好更多的利用。 用來分析大量資料的演算法 讓我們的醫生能夠 給予我們更好的治療, 還有很多其它的好處。 但沒有人會把他們的 醫療資料交出來, 也沒有人會坐上一台 由演算法來駕駛的汽車, 除非他們信任與 他們打交道的公司。 但那種信任並不是一直都存在的。 比如,現今,不到四分之一的歐洲人 信任線上企業會 保護他們的個人資訊。
But what if people knew that they could rely on technology companies to treat them fairly? What if they knew that those companies respond to competition by trying to do better, by trying to serve consumers better, not by using their power to shut out competitors, say, by pushing their services far, far down the list of search results and promoting themselves? What if they knew that compliance with the rules was built into the algorithms by design, that the algorithm had to go to competition rules school before they were ever allowed to work, that those algorithms were designed in a way that meant that they couldn't collude, that they couldn't form their own little cartel in the black box they're working in?
但如果人們知道 他們能夠信賴科技公司 會公平對待他們呢? 如果他們知道那些公司 面對競爭的因應方式 是把產品做得更好、 提供消費者更好的服務, 而不是用它們的權力 來阻擋競爭者, 比如,把它們的服務 推到搜尋結果列表的最最最下端, 然後只促銷它們自己的? 如果他們知道, 在設計這些演算法的時候 就有把對於這些規則 的遵循給內建進去, 讓那些演算法必須要先 進入競爭規則學校學習, 然後才可以被允許開始運作, 且這些演算法被設計成 沒有辦法共謀, 讓它們無法在它們運作的黑盒子中形成 小型的聯合壟斷行為,那會如何?
Together with regulation, competition rules can do that. They can help us to make sure that new technology treats people fairly and that everyone can compete on a level playing field. And that can help us build the trust that we need for real innovation to flourish and for societies to develop for citizens. Because trust cannot be imposed. It has to be earned.
加上了規範, 競爭規則就能做到那樣。 它們能協助我們確保 新科技會公平待人, 讓每個人都可以在 市場上公平競爭。 那就能協助我們建立信任, 我們需要信任才能做真正的創新, 才能興旺繁榮, 社會才能進步、人民才能受惠。 因為信任不是能夠強加於人的。 信任是掙來的。
Since the very first days of the European Union, 60 years ago, our competition rules have helped to build that trust. A lot of things have changed. It's hard to say what those six representatives would have made of a smartphone. But in today's world, as well as in their world, competition makes the market work for everyone. And that is why I am convinced that real and fair competition has a vital role to play in building the trust we need to get the best of our societies, and that starts with enforcing our rules, actually just to make the market work for everyone.
自從歐盟的最初時期, 六十年前, 我們的競爭規則一直在協助 建立那樣的信任。 很多事物都改變了。 很難說那六位代表 會怎麼看待智慧型手機。 但在現今的世界上, 以及在他們的世界上, 市場因為競爭讓所有人受益。 這就是為什麼我深信, 真正的、公平的競爭 扮演著關鍵的角色, 它能協助建立我們需要的信任, 來讓我們的社會呈現最好的一面, 而這一切會從強力執行 我們的規則開始, 讓市場能為每個人服務。
Thank you.
謝謝。
(Applause)
(掌聲)
Bruno Giussani: Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner.
布魯諾吉尤薩尼:謝謝你。 謝謝你,委員長。
Margrethe Vestager: It was a pleasure.
瑪格蕾莎維絲塔格:是我的榮幸。
BG: I want to ask you two questions. The first one is about data, because I have the impression that technology and data are changing the way competition takes place and the way competition regulation is designed and enforced. Can you maybe comment on that?
布魯諾:我有兩個問題想請教。 第一個問題與資料有關, 因為我的印象是 科技和資料會改變競爭的方式 也會改變競爭的設計與執行的方式。 你能否對此發表意見?
MV: Well, yes, it is definitely challenging us, because we both have to sharpen our tools but also to develop new tools. When we were going through the Google responses to our statement of objection, we were going through 5.2 terabytes of data. It's quite a lot. So we had to set up new systems. We had to figure out how to do this, because you cannot work the way you did just a few years ago. So we are definitely sharpening up our working methods. The other thing is that we try to distinguish between different kinds of data, because some data is extremely valuable and they will form, like, a barrier to entry in a market. Other things you can just -- it loses its value tomorrow. So we try to make sure that we never, ever underestimate the fact that data works as a currency in the market and as an asset that can be a real barrier for competition.
瑪格蕾莎:是的, 它的確在挑戰著我們, 因為我們得要磨礪我們的工具, 也要開發新的工具。 當我們去探究 Google 對我們提出的異議 所做的回應, 我們面對的是 5.2TB 的資料量。 這數量很驚人。 所以我們得要建立新的系統。 我們得要想出如何做, 因為幾年前的方法已經行不通了。 所以我們肯定得 精進我們的作業方法。 另外一件事是,我們嘗試著 區別出不同類型的資料, 因為有些資料是極度珍貴的, 而它們會形成進入市場的障礙。 其它事情你可以直接…… 它明天就失去價值了。 所以我們試圖要確保 我們永遠不會低估資料在市場中 以一種貨幣形式來運作的事實, 且資料也是種會 真正阻礙競爭的資產。
BG: Google. You fined them 2.8 billion euros a few months ago.
布魯諾:幾個月前, 你們對 Google 開罰 28 億歐元。
MV: No, that was dollars. It's not so strong these days.
瑪格蕾莎:不,是美元。 現在它已經不那麼強勢了。
BG: Ah, well, depends on the --
布魯諾:啊,嗯,那就要看…
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
Google appealed the case. The case is going to court. It will last a while. Earlier, last year, you asked Apple to pay 13 billion in back taxes, and you have also investigated other companies, including European and Russian companies, not only American companies, by far. Yet the investigations against the American companies are the ones that have attracted the most attention and they have also attracted some accusations. You have been accused, essentially, of protectionism, of jealousy, or using legislation to hit back at American companies that have conquered European markets. "The Economist" just this week on the front page writes, "Vestager Versus The Valley." How do you react to that?
Google 對這案子提出上訴, 接下來會上法庭。 它會持續一段時間。 先前,去年,你要求蘋果 補繳 130 億元的稅款, 你也調查了其它公司, 包括歐洲和俄國公司, 顯然不只是美國公司。 但,針對美國公司的調查 是最吸引注意力的調查, 也是吸引最多控訴的調查。 你曾被指控,基本上, 是個保護主義者、善妒忌、 或是立法來打擊那些 征服歐洲市場的美國公司。 《經濟人》這週的頭版寫著: 「維絲塔格摃上矽谷」。 妳的回應是什麼?
MV: Well, first of all, I take it very seriously, because bias has no room in law enforcement. We have to prove our cases with the evidence and the facts and the jurisprudence in order also to present it to the courts. The second thing is that Europe is open for business, but not for tax evasion.
瑪格蕾莎:首先, 我很嚴肅看待此事, 因為在執法上是不容許偏見的。 我們必須要用證據、事實、法庭判例 來證明我們的案件, 才能夠在法庭上提出來。 第二點,歐洲是 開放給大家做生意的, 但不是給大家逃稅用的。
(Applause)
(掌聲)
The thing is that we are changing, and for instance, when I ask my daughters -- they use Google as well -- "Why do you do that?" They say, "Well, because it works. It's a very good product." They would never, ever, come up with the answer, "It's because it's a US product." It's just because it works. And that is of course how it should be. But just the same, it is important that someone is looking after to say, "Well, we congratulate you while you grow and grow and grow, but congratulation stops if we find that you're misusing your position to harm competitors so that they cannot serve consumers."
重點是,我們在改變, 比如,當我問我的女兒們── 她們也用 Google── 「妳們為什麼要用 Google ?」 她們說:「因為它好用。 它是很好的產品。」 她們永遠不會回答說: 「因為它是美國產品。」 只是因為它好用。 當然,也應該要這樣才對。 但,同樣重要的是, 會有監管的人說: 「嗯,我們恭喜你, 恭喜你不斷成長再成長。 但我們會停止恭喜, 如果發現了你濫用優勢 去傷害競爭者,
BG: It will be a fascinating case to follow.
讓他們無法服務消費者。」
Thank you for coming to TED.
布魯諾:這個案件很值得追蹤後續。 謝謝你來 TED。
MV: It was a pleasure. Thanks a lot.
瑪格蕾莎:是我的榮幸。非常謝謝。
(Applause)
(掌聲)