General Election will decide Britain's broadband future
Posted on 27 Nov 2009 at 08:29
The outcome of next year's General Election will go a long way to deciding the future of British broadband, according to industry experts.
Speaking at a Westminster eForum on the future of Britain's internet, the chief executive of the Broadband Stakeholder Group (BSG) said that broadband policy is split down party lines.
On the one hand, you have Labour's "industrial activism" which plans to subsidise universal access to 2Mbits/sec broadband and use the 50p "broadband tax" to pay for next-generation networks.
Do we as a country want to push fibre to go faster and further than it would naturally? If we do, some kind of financial levy will be required - BT
On the other, you have the Conservatives' "market activism", which will leave the expansion of the broadband network to market forces.
Either way, broadband policy will remain up in the air until the General Election. "We've got to accept that there's considerable uncertainty going forward, especially for the next few months," BSG chief executive Antony Walker claimed.
That opinion was echoed by Matt Yardley, partner at IT consultants Analysys Mason. "[Lord] Carter's idea of a fund [for next-generation broadband] was pre-emptive and unusual, but there's some doubt at this stage whether it's going to come into being," he said.
Government-funded broadband
Whoever wins the election, many experts believe that public money will be necessary to bring high-speed broadband to the entire country.
Walker claimed that BSG research showed that the industry alone would only reach 60% of the country with next-generation networks. "As you get into more rural areas, investment gets a lot harder," he said.
BT painted an even more pessimistic picture. "Investment in fibre is risky and expensive," Tim O'Sullivan, director of public affairs at BT said. BT has committed to bring fibre to 40% of the country by 2012, but O'Sullivan claimed that there was "no commercial case beyond 40% at present."
He said the politicians had to make a stark choice. "It boils down to a policy decision," O'Sullivan said. "Do we as a country want to push fibre to go faster and further than it would naturally? If we do, some kind of financial levy will be required."
Waste of money
BT rival TalkTalk claims that spending public money on next-generation broadband would be both wasteful and damaging. "We think it's absolute nonsense," said the company's executive director of strategy, Andrew Heaney, referring to the proposed broadband tax. "The last thing you need is the Government wading in and saying 'we know best'".
Heaney claimed the Digital Britain team approached the Treasury for £1bn worth of funding for next-gen broadband before the publication of its summer report, but was turned down. "The Treasury didn't think it was a good use of public money," he said. "If the Treasury doesn't think it was a good use of public money, why is it when financed out of the public's pocket?"
Heaney argued that the broadband tax would discourage companies from investing in high-speed rural broadband, while they waited for public funds to become available.
Author: Barry Collins
Would be a better investment than banks...
I still maintain that the Govt invetsing £25billion into a nation fibre deployment, and then changing planning laws to ensure fibre laid on all new developments, would have been more beneficial to the country as a whole than "investments" in banks.
A massive, concurrent, nationwide deployment of fibre would bring immediate employment for project managers, network engineers, and huge numbers of labourers and plant operators. And massive orders to equipment suppliers, and local business (butty shops, newsagents, pubs, chippies all do a roaring trade when roads are dug up)
Its not as if we have a labour shortage in this counry. And taking people off the dole and putting real money in their pocket tends to boost the economy, lowers the social burden, and highers tax receipts.
The build phase could have been shared equally between the big two (BT and GX), or even perhaps all operators willing to participate. Access to the fibre could then be charged on a commercial basis, ensuring equal access to all operators/telcos/carriers/ISPs, and delivers a return to the taxpayer. A very tangible return.
Management of the physical network could be achevied either by an LLU-type approach to last mile connection, or outsourced to a company, on the basis it provides a single dedicted ring-fenced "team", on a fixed term contract, with well publicised service levels.
Put it this way, what direct benefit has the banking investment bought? A mere FIFTY TWO companies have benefited form the Govts business loan scheme, THREE families from the mortgage scheme. Despite being bailed out the tune of hundreds of billions, banks are making huge job cuts,thus worsening the overall situation.
In the two years I have banged on about this (or the 8 years changing planing laws to make comms an essential utillity), no one has ever come up with a single solid reason why it cant be done. Plenty of excuses, but none qualified.
By alan_lj on 27 Nov 2009 
It's very easy to critisise the government for bailing out the banks, but look at the alternative. If the banks had been allowed to go bust, all the assets of the bank would have been seized and used to pay off their debts. The problem is that the banks assets include our savings and mortgages, would you really be happy to loose everything ?
I think it was in one of Dick Pountains columns some years ago that he pointed out that BT had offered to install Fibre to every property in the UK, at it's (BT's) expense for the right (but not the exclusive rights) to carry video. The government of the day said 'no'.
We are now reaping the results of the short sightedness of successive governments.
By my05jbr on 27 Nov 2009 
@my05jbr
Correct. It was the Thatcher government that said no. I have a feeling that it was in Jon Honeyball's column, but you may well be right.
By jgwilliams on 27 Nov 2009 
@alan_lj
Although I can see the necessity of the bank bail-out, and fully agree with the benefits that have followed, that has now been done and cannot be changed.
Your case for the investment in fibre - Spot on!
Unfortunately, it makes sense - therefore no government will do it
By greemble on 27 Nov 2009 
advertisement
- 10 ways to boost traffic to a WordPress blog
- Reaction to the Apple iPad: ten days later
- How to switch off Virgin Media's mobile broadband image compression
- Infotec/Ricoh: here not to help
- TomTom 940T vs iPhone TomTom: a real road test
- Nvidia Fermi update: they have names!
- Twitter oven lets you have your cake and tweet it
- Where online businesses go terribly wrong
- Google Nexus One: first look review
- Dreading the move to ADSL
- ZoneAlarm Internet Security Suite
- Webroot Internet Security Essentials
- Trend Micro Internet Security
- PC Tools Internet Security 2009
- Panda Internet Security 2009
- Norton Internet Security 2009
- Kaspersky Internet Security 2009
- F-Secure Internet Security 2009
- AVG Internet Security 8
- BullGuard Internet Security 8.5
advertisement
Printed from www.pcpro.co.uk


