Posted: 19th Nov, 2011 By: MarkJ
The
Independent Networks Cooperative Association (INCA), which seeks to support the development of local superfast broadband services, has warned that the government's approach to
funding national rollouts of next gen internet services (through its Broadband Delivery UK (BDUK) office) should be reviewed before more operators walk away.
The comments are a reference to
Geo Networks (Geo), a dedicated fibre optic solutions provider (i.e. FibreSpeed), which recently withdrew from the BDUK process over economic and competition concerns (
here). A day later the
Bath & North East Somerset Council (BNESC) gave up on BDUK too (
here), describing the process as expensive. INCA notes that
Cable & Wireless Worldwide has apparently also pulled out of the
Cumbria procurement.
INCA's CEO,
Malcolm Corbett, claims that one of the problems is that "
all local authorities are being steered towards a gap-funding model based on BT’s business case for rolling out [ FTTC ]," which could be hindering alternative solutions.
Malcolm Corbett, INCA's CEO, explained:
"Geo and other operators both large and small - Fujitsu Telecom, Gigaclear, Cybermoor, Fibre Options, IFNL, B4RN - are all working on plans that deliver much more FTTH – but they all require more investment than is currently on the table. If a proportion of that investment is to come from the private sector there has to be a level playing field; the concern is that gap funding automatically favours the incumbent."
Corbett also fears that BT could be placing too many "
restrictions" on how their physical infrastructure (cable ducts and telegraph poles) can be used, which makes "
the business case in rural areas" far "
tougher" to handle.
Corbett continued:
"It’s made tougher if BT prevents alternative operators from using PIA to provide backhaul to rural communities, to offer business grade connections (leased lines), or to connect mobile or wireless infrastructure. Ofcom is looking at these issues under its Business Connectivity Market Review, but that isn’t expected to reach conclusions until late 2012, well after the BDUK procurements should be moving ahead."
In fairness BT is a commercial company and is quite understandably trying to protect its assets. Perhaps the real problem here is thus with regulation and a failure to address some of the underlying problems, ideally
before allowing the process to proceed.
Corbett suggests that there are other areas at fault too. For example, he points to the governments
£1.5bn drive to connect
Smart Meters in homes and businesses. This could have been intelligently linked to the next generation broadband plan, except it wasn't.
Corbett said:
"As a rep from one of the main industry equipment suppliers said recently, ‘We’re happy to take the money off the government twice, but we can’t really see the point.’ Government needs to do more joining up of agendas at the national level whilst allowing more freedom to innovate at the local.
Government needs to move faster on the release of spectrum for wireless services and more pressure needs to be applied to Ofcom to fix the PIA problem so we can ensure a level playing field for all operators. It needs a bit of ministerial table thumping."
In reality INCA's opinions probably won't carry enough weight to change the situation, although we're certain that the government would rather be hearing more about the positive side of their efforts. So far there's not much to offer on that front as little actual BDUK related network building has taken place and probably won't do until sometime in 2012.
The BDUK office has at least managed to allocate its initial budget of
£530m (could rise to £830m by 2017) to various local authorities, which will now be tasked with ensuring that 90% of people can access a superfast broadband (
24Mbps+) ISP service by 2015.
UPDATE 21st November 2011One of our readers reminded us that Vtesse Networks ( Vtesse Broadband ) also effectively left the BDUK process approximately one year ago due to similar concerns (
here).