ITS Technology – Opportunity and Threat from UK Copper Switch Off

9. The Government recently published their new Online Harms White Paper, which appears to mark a significant shift toward a much more censored internet, where everything from fake news to hate speech and conspiracy theories could, at an extreme, end up being either removed at source or blocked by a broadband ISP.

The rules will focus upon major social networks (Facebook, Twitter etc.) but could also target smaller file-hosting sites, online forums, messaging services and even internet search engines. Smaller sites may struggle to implement effective filtering due to cost and limited human moderation resources (e.g. individual blogs are run by people who simply aren’t awake 24/7 to monitor such things).

One difficulty here is that there can be different interpretations of what is or is not “fake news” and some of the other content category definitions are similarly ambiguous. Suffice to say, many fear that in the race to protect internet users and children from harm we might ultimately sacrifice freedom of speech and expression. What are your thoughts on the recent proposals?

ANSWER:

ITS believes in creating a digital future that encourages wholesome use and the wellbeing of users, and protects the most vulnerable people in society from harm.

As a network provider, we meet our obligations under the telecoms act through our acceptable use policy and ensure our networks are used appropriately. Beyond this, the responsibility falls to content and service providers.

10. In keeping with the above, Government politicians are known to be concerned about the future adoption of DNS over HTTPs (DoH) technology. At present ISPs usually control their own Domain Name Systems (DNS), but the new encrypted DoH solution can be managed by a third-party (e.g. Google’s Chrome website browser) and they may in the future enable it by default.

Politicians are concerned that DoH may hamper their censorship plans and some ISPs are also worried that it could create more problems for their service, such as by hindering the operation of certain features. On the other hand DoH is fundamentally a security and privacy improvement for consumers. What is your perspective on this debate?

ANSWER:

We believe there has been a perceptible shift in where the power base lies in the digital value chain. Up until recently, ISPs controlled customers and network providers controlled the margins of the ISPs. However, the shift now means that this power is in the hands of over the top media and content providers.

We feel this is inevitable, so there needs to be more focus on this part of the market and on the ‘self-regulation’ of content providers i.e. social networks.

11. The Government wants to see nationwide coverage of “full fibre” (FTTP) broadband ISP networks by 2033 and in order to do that they’ve committed nearly £1bn to help foster such networks, such as through targeted investment schemes and vouchers. Do you think this is the right approach to achieve such an aim and, if not, what should they be doing differently?

ANSWER:

We fully support the voucher schemes, as well as grants and other subsidy provision as a way to stimulate demand. I must add though, that in the UK, state aid is often perceived to be a stigma and it shouldn’t. Across the rest of Europe, state aid is seen as a springboard to stimulate markets. The LFFN scheme is a great example of doing it the right way.

There is a clear need for these initiatives. To help further, the government could make the intentions of such schemes, such as public sector anchor tenancy, more straightforward in order to deliver its full fibre vision. Running procurements for grant funded programmes could also be phased, as we are all too aware of the skills shortage in this sector.

For all these reasons, and because of the fast-moving nature of this market, the government should also look at smart alternative financial models that will allow them to invest in innovative commercial schemes, such as asset sharing etc.

12. As part of the aforementioned effort the UK Government has already introduced a 5 year holiday on business rates for new fibre optic lines (effective since April 2017), although Scotland has just introduced a 10 years relief for the same purpose.

At the same time we note that the payback period for FTTP networks can be extremely lengthy, often extending to 10-15 years. Do you think the UK Government should also extend their relief from 5 years to 10 or possibly more?

ANSWER:

Yes, the government should do what it can in this area to offer relief to us altnets who are fulfilling its vision! But seriously, yes it should. Extending the period will give further incentive to build out the networks too, so more communities / businesses / residents will benefit.

13. Openreach and Ofcom have both recently launched consultations on their future approach to switching off old copper networks as part of a phased move toward full fibre FTTP infrastructure. What sort of challenges do you see this as creating in the future for ITS Technology, if any, and how do you think it should be handled?

ANSWER:

The copper switch off is inevitable and we encourage it as fibre or gigabit wireless is the future of connectivity. It presents both opportunity and threat. There is a threat if the incumbent uses its scale and go to market capabilities to try to recreate a monopoly. However, there’s a greater opportunity and place for all as agile altnets continue to accelerate full fibre rollout as copper switches off.

There’s also strong emerging evidence and experience from elsewhere in Europe that we must consider at an early stage. For example, recognising that PSTN switch off to full IP Telephony is different to a copper switch off; also, that full copper switch off should be to the home, not just to the exchange/cabinet.

We’d just like to thank Daren for taking the time out to answer our questions.