» ISP News » 

Ed Vaizey MP Admits UK Mobile Infrastructure Project Was a Flop

Tuesday, March 1st, 2016 (7:46 am) - Score 963
wireless rural uk mip project mast

The Government’s Digital Economy Minister, Ed Vaizey, has finally gone on record to confirm that their £150 million Mobile Infrastructure Project (MIP), which was set-up to improve mobile phone network coverage in areas where there is currently none, has failed.

Politicians rarely like to admit their mistakes, which is in large part because the mass media tends to rip them to shreds when it happens. As such it’s refreshing to see a degree of honesty about a project that has been struggling for the past couple of years.

The Arqiva contract, which was supported by EE, Vodafone, O2 and Three UK (they were responsible for providing coverage from the sites and funding operating costs for 20 years), aimed to extend mobile coverage to around 60,000 notspot premises across the United Kingdom and a number of new masts did go live (e.g. Weaverthorpe in North Yorkshire).

However the project ended up being bogged down by a mix of problems, from delays in getting planning permission (some communities were unhappy and did protest), to challenges with securing wayleave agreements via lots of different land owners, the difficulty of confirming where “not spots” actually existed (mobile coverage is variable) and the inherent problem with finding a three phase power supply when in the middle of a very remote rural location.

Similar issues were also experienced with regards to the cost and time needed to deploy adequate backhaul capacity to those masts. On top of all that the project was due to run until 31st March 2016 (an extension on the original 2015 window), but it became clear at the end of last year that many masts still wouldn’t have even secured planning permission in time (here).

Ed Vaizey MP, Digital Economy Minister, said:

“I feel in a relatively philosophical mood as I gaze at 12 colleagues who are a sort of jury, ready to give a verdict on the programme. I must admit that I am guilty as charged. I do not think the programme has been a success, and I do not think that Ministers often say that about their programmes. My hon. Friend the Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Michael Tomlinson) predicted that I would be bullish about the programme in my usual bombastic—he did not say that word, but perhaps he meant it—fashion, but I will not be bullish about it.

I think that when Ministers defend their programmes, they should have credibility. I am happy to defend the superfast broadband roll-out, which I think has been an unequivocal success despite the occasional criticism I receive. I am also happy to defend our record on libraries, despite the brickbats that I get from library campaigners, but I am fully prepared to stand up in the Chamber and admit that the mobile infrastructure project has not been as successful as we had envisaged.

We set aside £150 million. We talked about 600 sites. Our heart was in the right place. We wanted to eliminate “not spots”, precisely because of the point that my hon. Friend the Member for Salisbury (John Glen) raised: mobile phones are essential to many people in their daily lives. We wanted to eliminate the “not spots” that exist as best we could. I am grateful to him for securing this important debate.”

The full exchange can be found online and is well worth a read in order to better understand some of the complexities involved, not least with regards to the tedious process of seeking planning permission that saw some councillors reject an already approved site simply because they hadn’t been given a choice of mast colours 🙂 .

Apparently, if a range of colours had been given, that would not have caused a delay, but the council wanted specific approval of the mast’s specific colour. That was compounded by the fact that the council and the area of outstanding natural beauty partnership did not respond to Arqiva’s request for guidance on what colour mast they wanted, to enable the council to make an application to discharge the planning condition—in other words, the colour of the mast,” said Ed Vaizey.

Unfortunately the MIP is now expected to be wound-up (only about 50 of the hundreds planned will actually be built), although the remaining money could still be made available for similar projects if local authorities identified a specific need.

The situation also leaves the Government with somewhat of a headache, particularly as the £5bn agreement to extend geographic mobile network coverage (voice and text) of the United Kingdom from 80% today to 90% by 2017 (3G /4G data coverage will also be pushed to 85%) may yet face some of the same problems (here).

It’s understood that Government will use the MIP’s failure as a learning tool in order to develop a better approach for future contracts, not least through tweaks to the planning process and a change to how mobile operators gauge network coverage (i.e. by geography instead of premises passed).

Share with Twitter
Share with Linkedin
Share with Facebook
Share with Reddit
Share with Pinterest
Mark Jackson
By Mark Jackson
Mark is a professional technology writer, IT consultant and computer engineer from Dorset (England), he also founded ISPreview in 1999 and enjoys analysing the latest telecoms and broadband developments. Find me on Twitter, , Facebook and Linkedin.
Leave a Comment
10 Responses
  1. Avatar Stephen

    I heard from our local authority in Aberdeenshire that none of the sights identified (there were over a dozen) were accepted because there was at least 1 ISP providing 2G in the area. In some cases this was all that was available. These areas were not considered a notspot as there was some coverage available (god help you if you had an accident and you were on the wrong network).
    If this is the criteria that was being used it’s no wonder the project failed. Is it really acceptable in this day & age to have one provider giving 2G?

  2. Avatar dragoneast

    It’d be lovely (not) if there were a magic wand to just make things happen and everyone fall into line. But the reality is that these small islands are one of the most regulated countries in the world, with a long history. And the regulation isn’t an accident either, it’s grown up to deal with real problems that matter to people (though not to us, often). And (unfortunately) the views of people (even those who disagree with us) matter too. So a lot of “getting things done” is patient fudge and compromise, and it takes time. Get used to it. Many of the politicians who complain so much have homes in the conservation and environmentally important areas that give us so much trouble (for that very reason) and they and their families are amongst the “wicked” landowners too. It makes it all very complicated.

  3. Avatar Patrick Cosgrove

    I wonder which AONB Partnership and which Council in that quote. Does anyone know?

    • Which quote? The one about coloured masts? It related to a planning application around North Hill Farm, although I’m not entirely sure which part of the UK.

    • Avatar MikeW

      Ed Vaizey refers to the constituency of someone – possibly the originator of the debate

  4. Avatar gerarda

    The 60,000 notspot premises was itself a significant scaling down of the original target, and even on the scaled down version there should have been some A road improvements too. All in all a huge waste of time and money.

  5. Avatar wirelesspacman

    “…and admit that the mobile infrastructure project has not been as successful as we had envisaged”

    Presumably politician double-speak for “abject failure”! 🙂

  6. Avatar MikeW

    It looks to me like the new measures moving forward will largely hinge on getting 300 new sites up for the EE emergency services coverage.

    Perhaps being for emergencies will sharpen the minds of the planning committees.

    Beyond that, look forward to taller masts.

Comments RSS Feed

Javascript must be enabled to post (most browsers do this automatically)

Privacy Notice: Please note that news comments are anonymous, which means that we do NOT require you to enter any real personal details to post a message. By clicking to submit a post you agree to storing your comment content, display name, IP, email and / or website details in our database, for as long as the post remains live.

Only the submitted name and comment will be displayed in public, while the rest will be kept private (we will never share this outside of ISPreview, regardless of whether the data is real or fake). This comment system uses submitted IP, email and website address data to spot abuse and spammers. All data is transferred via an encrypted (https secure) session.

NOTE 1: Sometimes your comment might not appear immediately due to site cache (this is cleared every few hours) or it may be caught by automated moderation / anti-spam.

NOTE 2: Comments that break our rules, spam, troll or post via known fake IP/proxy servers may be blocked or removed.
Cheapest Superfast ISPs
  • Hyperoptic £19.95 (*22.00)
    Avg. Speed 50Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: Promo Code: HYPER20
  • NOW TV £22.00 (*40.00)
    Avg. Speed 36Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • SSE £22.00
    Avg. Speed 35Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • xln telecom £22.74 (*47.94)
    Avg. Speed 66Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Vodafone £22.95
    Avg. Speed 35Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
Prices inc. Line Rental | View All
The Top 20 Category Tags
  1. BT (2689)
  2. FTTP (2526)
  3. FTTC (1738)
  4. Building Digital UK (1677)
  5. Politics (1571)
  6. Openreach (1537)
  7. Business (1352)
  8. FTTH (1272)
  9. Statistics (1186)
  10. Mobile Broadband (1153)
  11. Fibre Optic (1033)
  12. 4G (996)
  13. Wireless Internet (984)
  14. Ofcom Regulation (983)
  15. Virgin Media (959)
  16. EE (663)
  17. Sky Broadband (648)
  18. TalkTalk (631)
  19. Vodafone (622)
  20. 5G (456)
Helpful ISP Guides and Tips

Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved - Terms , Privacy and Cookie Policy , Links , Website Rules , Contact