By: MarkJ - 1 February, 2012 (12:49 PM) - Score: 2646 - Fixed Line Broadband
The North Tyneside Council (NTC) has confirmed that it aims to "exceed national targets" by making superfast broadband ISP services available to 91% of the borough by 2015 and without public funding from the Broadband Delivery UK (BDUK) office. Sadly this means that those in the last 9% have been given a "low priority" and will instead be stuck with "a 2Mbps service".The news follows shortly after the UK governments Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) released a new progress report (here), which labelled North Tyneside as being one of the local authorities that was most at risk of having their funding pulled due to the slow pace of progress.
The council is supposed to have its "draft" Local Broadband Plan (LBP) approved by the governments deadline (end of February 2012), which is naturally a little difficult to do when you don't have one. As a result some £880k of BDUK funds, which the council would have been expected to match, is likely to be withdrawn.
Elected Mayor for North Tyneside, Mrs Linda Arkley, said:
"I can give a firm commitment to our residents and business that we are on target to deliver superfast broadband where it is needed most, by 2015.
In this instance, given the pressures on resources at the present time, we felt that the benefits of increasing the coverage of superfast broadband across the remaining 9 per cent of the borough, would be limited, and therefore a low priority when deciding how best to spend council tax payers' money."
"I can give a firm commitment to our residents and business that we are on target to deliver superfast broadband where it is needed most, by 2015.
In this instance, given the pressures on resources at the present time, we felt that the benefits of increasing the coverage of superfast broadband across the remaining 9 per cent of the borough, would be limited, and therefore a low priority when deciding how best to spend council tax payers' money."
Some of the locals whom live in that last 9% are likely to be very disappointed. The council, with a rare opportunity to go well beyond the target, has instead chosen to merely meet the target (ok.. "exceed" by just 1%) and go no further.
The council instead claims to have taken an "active" role in helping BT to deploy its superfast broadband ( FTTC / FTTP ) services in the area, although it's not clear what that has entailed; beyond allowing BT to go where it was already intending. Credits to Thinkbroadband for spotting this.
Tweet
Comments: 30
NickPosted: 1 February, 2012 - 2:08 PM
Link to comment
I expect the 'active' part was allowing BT to convince them they didn't need to go out to a tender process ("you've only got 900k, you'll have spend the same and a similar amount on the tender process" - you can imagine the conversation)
DeductionPosted: 1 February, 2012 - 5:49 PM
Link to comment
quote"The council is supposed to have its "draft" Local Broadband Plan (LBP) approved by the governments deadline (end of February 2012), which is naturally a little difficult to do when you don't have one. As a result some £880k of BDUK funds, which the council would have been expected to match, is likely to be withdrawn."
No, No, its state aid according to some that post here so if it were withdrew its up to the European Union. The local councils report to them. Not our government at all.
Either this news is incorrect, or a certain individual that has been claiming that for over 2 weeks in the comments is posting FUD.
FUD which is obviously allowed here.
GadgetPosted: 1 February, 2012 - 7:26 PM
Link to comment
Hopefully this link should clarify what State Aid is and why the EU has a say in it
http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/overview/what_is_state_aid.html
DeductionPosted: 1 February, 2012 - 8:01 PM
Link to comment
The BDUK is not an EU fund and the DCMS has nothing to do with EU rule.
http://www.culture.gov.uk/about_us/default.aspx
http://www.culture.gov.uk/about_us/our_ministers/default.aspx
I insist the FUD stops.
MarkJ remove the misleading FUD please.
GadgetPosted: 1 February, 2012 - 8:52 PM
Link to comment
No one has ever suggested that BDUK is not a government body, as your links clearly agree.
The issue is that if the government (BDUK) is making aid available then there are conditions that aid must comply with so that it is not deemed State Aid by the EU (Even though the aid/money does not come from the EU).
Just for the avoidance of doubt here is the first paragraph from my link -
"A company which receives government support obtains an advantage over its competitors. Therefore, the EC Treaty generally prohibits State aid unless it is justified by reasons of general economic development. To ensure that this prohibition is respected and exemptions are applied equally across the European Union, the European Commission is in charge of watching over the compliance of State aid with EU rules."
DeductionPosted: 2 February, 2012 - 2:29 AM
Link to comment
FOR THE LAST TIME.
The BDUK is not an EU fund. It has nothing to do with EU law.
quote"The issue is that if the government (BDUK)......"
This clearly demonstrates you dont know what you are on about the government department is the DCMS, (which stands for Department culture Media and Sport).
The BDUK, is the name of the fund (and stands for Broadband Delivery United Kingdom).
The BDUK is not the government.
http://discuss.bis.gov.uk/bduk/about/
quote"Broadband Delivery UK (BDUK) has been created within DCMS as a delivery vehicle for the Government’s policies on broadband, reporting to Ed Vaizey as the Minister for Culture, Communications and Creative Industries. The BDUK team brings together a mixture of skills from the public and private sector and is currently based within the BIS offices at 1 Victoria Street, London."
NOTHING TO DO WITH EU LAW
GadgetPosted: 2 February, 2012 - 9:11 AM
Link to comment
Then why does BDUK themselves acknowledge the need to comply???
http://discuss.bis.gov.uk/bduk/files/2011/03/BDUK_Market-Engagement_280211.pdf -slide 6
reproduced below
BDUK’s criteria for assessing its sourcing strategy are:
•Balance economies of scale with including local requirements and circumstances
•Maximise supplier competition where it exists
•Minimise aggregate transaction costs for the public and private sector
•Maximise leverage of other public and private sector funding
•Consistent with State Aid and EU procurement regulations
Briecheese TotalpongPosted: 2 February, 2012 - 10:51 AM
Link to comment
I suggest you look at the actual title on page 6 and observe page 4.
"Desired outcomes" IE what they would like.
Page 4 clearly shows EU only comes into things when EU funding is in the chain.
The other poster is correct.
GadgetPosted: 2 February, 2012 - 11:25 AM
Link to comment
Source of funding is not the issue. Surely consistency with State aid and EU regulations is a not-unreasonable outcome.
Suggest you refer to the link especially the last para
http://www.thelawyer.com/pinsents-bags-solo-role-on-broadband-project/1008664.article
"The project, which involves the allocation of state aid, will face heavy EU regulation."
and also
http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/when-it-meets-politics/2012/01/has-bduk-retained-pinsent-maso.html
"I am told that BDUK engaged Pinsent Mason to write an umbrella state aid exemption for the entire UK. This is unlikely to be in place (assuming it is approved which is unlikely) before the Summer. Each county by county procurement must then seek individual state aid approval."
NickPosted: 2 February, 2012 - 1:04 PM
Link to comment
Sorry Deduction, Gadget is 100% correct. EU law takes precedence over UK law.
All state funding which could be considered unfair competition has to go through the EU approvals process (I have been though this a number of times) to determine whether it is justified state aid.
BDUK are trying to lump all of their projects under one state aid application (which may still be tenuous), but all projects outside will have to have an individual application.
If they give all the money to BT it makes it a more difficult case, but Cornwall seemed to have managed it.
DeductionPosted: 2 February, 2012 - 1:49 PM
Link to comment
quote"BDUK are trying to lump all of their projects under one state aid application (which may still be tenuous), but all projects outside will have to have an individual application."
and thats where you have it right and he doesnt.....
It only applies to LOCAL PROJECTS...
http://www.culture.gov.uk/images/publications/BDF__PIN_FAQsV.pdf
what happens outside of that will not be decided until later this year.
Sept 2012 to be precise so unless he can predict the future his current (dis) information is wrong.
New_LondonerPosted: 3 February, 2012 - 4:25 PM
Link to comment
@Deduction
Sorry but you are totally wrong on this. EU state aid rules apply to any project using state aid (whether from local, national or EU authorities). Whether the project in question is a community project, local project or any other type of project is irrelevant.
For completeness, open access is also a requirement, with wholesale provision.
You've been provided to numerous links to documents from different sources that confirm this is the case. Please read som of them, take it up with the authors (mainly government departments) if you feel they are wrong.
DeductionPosted: 3 February, 2012 - 6:13 PM
Link to comment
They are not wrong you are i linked to the evidence that shows it wont be decided until Sept 2012. Nick also identified that. Not my fault whatever persona you are using thinks it has a crystal ball.
GadgetPosted: 3 February, 2012 - 6:23 PM
Link to comment
What has not be decided currently is if the funding is allowable State Aid, and if the decision is made before the EU review of rules in Sept then well and good otherwise potentially new rules.
Your link 1.1 is "Will there be pre-approved State Aid notification" and the response was NO
Your link 1.2 is "What is the anticipated impact of the European Commission's current review of the State aid guidelines for broadband" and the answer was "don't know until it is announced, but they anticipate notifying ahead of the announcement.
Neither alter the current discussion of "is it State Aid"?
New_LondonerPosted: 3 February, 2012 - 6:47 PM
Link to comment
@Deduction, Gadget
So given we agree that we can only talk about the current rules that apply, lrt'd br clear that EU state aid rules apply whether or not the state aid comes from the EU or the UK. They also apply whether or no the project is classified as "local", "community" or any other label that someone wants to dream up.
@Deduction
Like I posted above, you've been provided to numerous links to documents from different sources that confirm this is the case. Please read some of them properly before commenting on this, and take it up with the authors (mainly government departments) if you feel they are wrong and you are right.
Glad we've cleared that up!
DeductionPosted: 4 February, 2012 - 3:05 AM
Link to comment
quote"They also apply whether or no the project is classified as "local", "community" or any other label that someone wants to dream up. "
Nope not until Sept 2012, you can claim otherwise the literature is clear. Its also not clever to talk to yourself. Why didnt you use you fibrefred ID on this occasion?
New_LondonerPosted: 4 February, 2012 - 9:11 AM
Link to comment
@deduction
If you feel EU state aid rules don't apply today, please explain why, for example, the BDUK guidance documents say the opposite?
DeductionPosted: 4 February, 2012 - 8:07 PM
Link to comment
As provided
http://www.culture.gov.uk/images/publications/BDF__PIN_FAQsV.pdf
which states sept 2012 for a decision
GadgetPosted: 4 February, 2012 - 8:31 PM
Link to comment
I assume you are refering to Section1.2 in the document and says nothing about State Aid not applying.
It does state that the EU decision on any modification of the State Aid requirements for broadband will not be decided until September 2012 and that BDUK expect to have applied for a decision about the allowability of the aid before then.
So again where does it say that State aid rules don't apply and why are BDUK applying for approval if they don't?
DeductionPosted: 5 February, 2012 - 5:14 PM
Link to comment
As provided
http://www.culture.gov.uk/images/publications/BDF__PIN_FAQsV.pdf
which states sept 2012 for a decision
New_LondonerPosted: 5 February, 2012 - 6:14 PM
Link to comment
@Deduction
In the meantime the rules exist, are in place! See previous links to BDUK documents, not posts from Marvin at Shetland Telecom, see docs on the Urban Broadband Fund, Cornwall....
Some people continue to insist the earth is flat despite the evidence, however doesn't make them right anymore than your persistent rejection of EU state aid rules makes you right. Do some research as this is getting embarrassing.
GadgetPosted: 5 February, 2012 - 9:13 PM
Link to comment
Sept 2012 is the date suggested for possible revisions to the current rules
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/11/493
This is what is in place currently
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/09/1332&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en
and heres a Q&A about the current rules
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/09/396&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en
So once read and digested can be agree that
a) there are current state aid rules
b) they MAY be revised in Sept 2012
and then Deduction's link to the PIN will make sense to all
New_LondonerPosted: 5 February, 2012 - 10:33 PM
Link to comment
Thanks Gadget, hopefully this is clear to all!
DeductionPosted: 6 February, 2012 - 1:08 AM
Link to comment
quote"Yep someone is just arguing for arguing sake"
and agreeing with itself constantly LMAO
MikePosted: 6 February, 2012 - 5:14 PM
Link to comment
It would appear so, it probably has nothing better to do.
DeductionPosted: 7 February, 2012 - 1:44 AM
Link to comment
It has taken quite a shine to following me around, i must have a good looking bottom or something LOL
DeductionPosted: 9 February, 2012 - 1:35 AM
Link to comment
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, unfortunately i find myself wishing you were blind.
Generated in 0.65762 seconds.
DB queries: 8
Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved (Terms, Privacy Policy, Links (.), Live Chat & Website Rules).