Government green lights broadband tax

"the next generation of super-fast broadband"

I think he means the LAST generation
- bringing the UK's digital infrastructure into the 20th Century

By greemble on 9 Dec 2009

90% of the country by the end of 2017

8 years to get 2Mbits/sec - how far behind the rest of the world will we be by then? And what about the other 10%?

By gpmfitzgerald on 9 Dec 2009

Jesus!

"The tax will be spent bringing 2Mbits/sec broadband to 90% of the country by the end of 2017"

What a load of shit, nothing like aiming low. By 2017 everyone shoud have access to at least 3-4Mbits.

By JStairmand on 9 Dec 2009

Maths?

If the total tax raised is £170 million that is only 4 million households paying £6 for the next 7 years (the widely touted "£42"). I think there are rather more than 4 million households with landlines.

Anyway, what are the chances of Labour winning the election? I predict the amount raised by this tax will be about £0.

By halsteadk on 9 Dec 2009

So are we to assume that those lucky enough to have cable broadband get off scott free? Considering they are getting speeds "up to" 25 meg its only fair that they be stung by this tax too.

By jamesv1001 on 9 Dec 2009

FTH is the way to go

All funding should be going to Fibre to the Home
Why waste money on anything else
As BT has the monopoly on the land line infrastructure, they should be forced to do it, or break them up into 2 seperate companies, with one being for infrastructure which is Government subsidised
The Government found billions to bail out the bankers, so why not find the money for 21st century broadband

By firefox1275 on 9 Dec 2009

Myopia - the new vision for the future

As usual, we "see" from our Government all the vision and forward thought of a myopic slug! Said slug is, coincidentally, faster than the "21st century" broadband speed proposed by these jokers. I assume that their 'research' on what might constitute acceptably useful broadband speeds in one of the world's (at any rate previously) leading economies has been carried out in Afghanistan?!

By Eltee on 9 Dec 2009

Nice to see the FUD is as present as ever...

From this article:

"BT has claimed it would require £5 billion to bring broadband to every home in Britain, some way short of the £170 million the tax is expected to rise."

From an earlier article from PC Pro http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/broadband/351826/broad
band-tax-will-be-law-by-next-election :

"The Conservatives are expected to oppose the tax, which will add around £175m a year to the broadband coffer"

So not only has it dropped by £5 million from one article to the other, it's also changed from £175m/pa to £170m in total.

Even using the new lower figure (source?), six years of £170m works out at £1.02 billion.

Yes, still way short of BT's "£5 billion" figure, but this levy is not to totally pay for corporations to be upgraded. This is (and always has been, despite certain attempts to mislead us to the contrary) not about the entire country, but the "final third" who will, as ever, be left out of any industry-led infrastructure upgrades, through various means - satellite, 3G, WiMax and other technologies.

But don't take my word for this last part - see this PC Pro article about the Broadband tax:

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/256492/government-anno
unces-broadband-tax

where the statement is pretty clear.

Just a shame that PC Pro's ability to refer to its own articles seems to be on a downward slide and, based on lots of people's comments, PC Pro really should make sure that they keep things as accurate as possible on this issue, otherwise people will be complaining about something that isn't actually happening.

By bioreit on 9 Dec 2009

I'm not bothered

I don't have a land line.

Skype and cable broadband for me.

Still a rubbish idea though.

By Lacrobat on 10 Dec 2009

Very funny Mr. Government. £6 Tax, 2Mbits and 2017??? you had me going there...

I'm out of the country at the moment and here they are offering 100Mbits/sec for around £8 a month on a 24 months contract while 1000Mbits is about £35. So please someone tell me what they mean by "next generation of super-fast broadband to 90 per cent of the population by the end of 2017", I'm very confused.

By felixluk on 10 Dec 2009

scam

So.... basically we have to pay for BT’s upgrading of the network and other companies, so the companies can then charge us for using it!!!! BRILLIANT

By phoenix_digital on 10 Dec 2009

Don't Vote Labour

They just capitulate to BT press releases. Number of landlines will decline. Standing charge already too high, creating information divide.
If you don't have a home computer, it make sense to only have a mobile phone.
Should use TV transmitters to transmit "Data channel". I would use it for Linux Dists of 4.7GB. Users vote for content transmitted by local main transmitter. Use useless 'Red button' TV frequencies. This would relieve bottlenecks instead of creating new mobile phone bottlenecks.

By EconSim on 10 Dec 2009