Gov Eligibility Conflict Disrupts Some UK Gigabit Broadband Builds

A tricky conflict over eligibility for gigabit broadband vouchers and state aid subsidised contracts via the UK Government’s £5bn Project Gigabit scheme, which is overseen by the Broadband Delivery UK (BDUK) agency, appears to be disrupting the roll-out of full fibre (FTTP) networks in some rural parts of the country.

Just to recap. Project Gigabit aims to extend networks capable of delivering download speeds of at least 1000Mbps (inc. uploads of at least 200Mbps) to 85% or more of UK premises by the end of 2025, before rising to “nationwide” coverage (c.99%) by around 2030 (here). The project aims to achieve this by offering various support schemes, although this article is primarily focused upon the Gigabit Broadband Voucher Scheme (GBVS).

In terms of the GBVS, the scheme’s website makes clear that the primary eligibility requirements are for homes or businesses to reside in rural areas where existing broadband speeds are “less than 100Mbps” and a “gigabit capable network isn’t likely to be built to that area commercially in the near future” (i.e. no commercial or publicly funded gigabit network exists or is planned within the next 3 years).

Furthermore, any new connections deployed under the voucher scheme must be able to reach speeds that are at least double the existing connection performance, if your current speed is less than 50Mbps, or at least 100Mbps, if your current speed is more than 50Mbps.

Gigabit Voucher Eligibility Terms

1.1 To be eligible for a voucher via the Scheme, a Premises must:

1.1.1 be “Rural” according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS) or equivalent:

(a) ONS definitions D1 – F2 (England & Wales);

(b) NISRA definitions E – H (Northern Ireland);

(c) NRS definitions 3 – 8 (Scotland);

1.1.2 not be vacant / unoccupied / derelict;
1.1.3 not have speeds of more than 100 Mbps available;
1.1.4 not be part of a planned or ongoing other UK Government subsidy initiative or programme to deliver Gigabit Capable Networks,as determined by the Authority, unless the Authority has identified the Premises as being in a VPA; and
1.1.5 not be assessed by BDUK as likely to receive Gigabit Capable Networks without public subsidy.

Suffice to say that many areas upgraded under the government’s previous Superfast Broadband (SFBB) programme are allowed to benefit from gigabit vouchers, since many of those properties got speeds around the 25-50Mbps (very rough average) mark via Fibre-to-the-Cabinet (FTTC / VDSL2) and Fixed Wireless Access (FWA) technologies – both of which suffer from issues of variable performance (signal degradation over distance etc.).

A Technological Problem

Toward the end of last year ISPreview began receiving feedback from a small number of network operators that were running into some unusual problems with gigabit voucher eligibility in different parts of the UK. One of those is alternative network provider Technological, which has been rolling out a gigabit-capable Fibre-to-the-Premises (FTTP) network to several rural communities in the Mid Devon and West Somerset (England) areas.

The operator claims to have started seeing – around the tail end of summer 2023 – a situation where Unique Property Reference Numbers (UPRN) were being marked as ineligible for vouchers, which is despite the related properties (homes etc.) previously being in Voucher Priority (VPA) / GoList approved areas. Some example communities include Treborough and Armour Lane.

Technological feared this might mean that BDUK were going to implement a policy where any premises that had previously received any state aid intervention would no longer be eligible for intervention under Project Gigabit (either subsidised [GIS] contracts or voucher delivery). This, they suggested, might include all “superfast” (SFBB) FWA contracts and possibly some subsidised Openreach FTTC cabinets (i.e. those under Phase 1 of the original Superfast Broadband programme).

For example, one of Technological’s target villages – areas where they’re trying to build a new full fibre network via the voucher scheme – has 6 eligible UPRNs (properties) out of 31 scattered throughout the community. But a rival network serves some of this area via their FWA (wireless) network, which was deployed some years ago under the old SFBB (30Mbps+) contract via the Connecting Devon and Somerset (CDS) programme.

Normally such a situation would not be a problem as the gigabit vouchers should still be usable, as was the case before, but Technological say BDUK will now only allow them to build FTTP to 6 properties via vouchers, while they’re having to appeal the others. Some of those homes also have hills between them and the old network’s FWA mast, but are still flagged as being served by wireless.

Despite this, the FWA network’s related SFBB coverage under BDUK’s National Rolling Open Market Review (NR – OMR) process was, at the time of writing, still largely being flagged as “gigabit white“, which identifies premises that currently have no gigabit connectivity and where none is planned to arrive within the next 3 years. Based on that, there should be no obstruction to a full fibre upgrade, yet the problem persists.

Jim Weir, Technical Director of Technological Services, said:

“Eligibility within all the iterations of the Gigabit Voucher schemes has always been one of the most challenging aspects of the programme, but in the last 6 months we find our plans blocked at every turn with new, previously unannounced policy changes. It is inexplicable how some of these tiny clusters, in many cases 5 or 6 properties within a postcode, can have 3 or more different eligibility results.

What is most concerning is that no other operator is or has been delivering gigabit services in these areas, so in some cases we could have delivered these properties over 18 months ago when their neighbours went live, but we remain in BDUK dispute & deadlock. It does feel that BDUK lacks the capability to apply any common sense in these fringe cases and their sole objective is hoping that commercial delivery alone reaches the government’s 85% target by next year, abandoning any remains of the Outside In policy.

When FWA was first proposed as a technology on Exmoor in 2015, many communities raised concerns that it would act as a future barrier to any fixed line upgrades but were repeatedly reassured this would not be the case. It is hard to fathom why BDUK now view a 30Mbps FWA service as an impediment to any further intervention within Project Gigabit in these rural areas.

It is deeply concerning that BDUK are unable to explain or justify the grounds for this policy, nor had any discussion regarding this with the local body, Connecting Devon & Somerset, and as a result will block any future Full Fibre rollout by any operator in these areas, leaving these areas with long term socio-economic barriers.”

One of the properties being impacted by this problem in the region is a technology and data business called Shearwell Data, which had been hoping to gain access to gigabit broadband connectivity but has instead been left to struggle with a much older and less reliable connection.

Richard Webber, MD of Shearwell Data, said:

“We are a hi tec company servicing the agricultural industry worldwide employing 140 people. It is essential we have access to reliable, fast internet on our trial farm at GOOSEMOOR.

Airband’s performance has been disappointingly lacklustre on multiple fronts. The reliability of the service leaves much to be desired, with unexpected downtime lasting for hours or even days. The maximum data speed of 40 Mbps falls short of the demands of modern businesses, leading to frustratingly sluggish performance.

Adding to the woes, the support from Airband when issues arise is far from satisfactory, often falling well below the expectations of businesses relying on a stable internet connection. Trying to run a business with Airband as the ISP feels like navigating a minefield of uncertainties, where downtime can disrupt operations unexpectedly. It’s a challenging scenario that underscores the difficulties businesses face when relying on Airband for their internet needs.”

Richard mentions Airband’s old wireless network above, although it should be said that the core issue around BDUK’s eligibility rules may touch several other wireless networks, as well as a few edge case FTTC deployments, in different parts of the country.

BDUK’s Position

Naturally we queried this with BDUK via the Government’s Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT), which confirmed how homes and businesses that only have access to broadband speeds below 1 Gigabit per second (1Gbps) are still in scope for Project Gigabit’s contracts, vouchers, and hubs.

However, BDUK acknowledged that, in a small number of cases, some legacy contracts under the SFBB programme did predominantly provide some properties with speeds below 30Mbps. But crucially they say these premises are now able to access speeds of above 30Mbps and, in some cases, 100Mbps+. This might reflect the fact that it’s often simpler and quicker to upgrade an existing fixed wireless network (no cables to change etc.).

Put another way, BDUK are currently choosing to prioritise upgrades for other homes and businesses – those that have not had access to higher speeds as a result of wireless builds under the old SFBB programme. But the agency clarified that the affected premises will still be in scope for Project Gigabit, albeit only if they continue to have access to speeds below 1Gbps before the programme is complete (i.e. wireless networks are being given a bit more time to upgrade, but precisely how much time seems to be a bit vague).

A DSIT spokesperson told ISPreview.co.uk:

“It is not correct to suggest that properties that have previously received state funding for network upgrade will no longer be in scope for further intervention under Project Gigabit.”

Technological claims this means, at least for now, that potentially tens of thousands of premises in their own focus area (i.e. those covered by wireless networks under the old SFBB contracts) may be ineligible for a full fibre upgrade – via vouchers or the subsidy scheme – until such time as BDUK changes their stance. But the network provider also claims to have had some success in securing vouchers in a number of locations where the same issue should exist, which only adds to the eligibility confusion.

At this point it’s easy to appreciate both sides of the argument. The current rules, at least those expressed in public, suggest that network operators like Technological should be able to upgrade such areas to full fibre. But on the flip side, fixed wireless networks aren’t as static as older fixed lines and upgrades to backhaul or changes of equipment (CPE, transmitters / antenna etc.) can often quickly improve their performance.

However, Technological claims that some FWA networks in a similar position have never upgraded relevant parts of their network (i.e. they still suffer sub-30Mbps speeds) and have, in the recent past, also used vouchers to overbuild their own FWA networks with FTTP in certain communities. All told, this creates a lot of confusion and shifting goal posts around eligibility, which would be difficult for any network operator to navigate with confidence.

The primary issue here seems to be focused on older FWA deployments and Technological are not the only operator to raise it (others didn’t want to go on record), although some operators also claim to have run into a similar issue with certain premises that can only access slower FTTC (VDSL2) lines from Openreach. But so far BDUK indicates that this is primarily an issue with FWA networks, not FTTC.

Similarly, we must not forget that BDUK/DSIT is under a lot of pressure and scrutiny to ensure the best use of taxpayers’ money (risk aversion is par for the course), while also needing to be mindful of any potential legal risks associated with overbuilding subsidised wireless infrastructure – networks that may have the capability to rapidly improve and adapt if the necessary investment is made.

UPDATE 0:10am:

Since writing this article, BDUK has informed Technological that some of the premises in question were not previously flagged within their dataset as having a subsidised FWA connection, but this apparently changed in March 2023 when new supplier data was presented. At that point BDUK found the premises to be ineligible for support through the voucher scheme, but they did agree to honour projects that had received approval prior to this new data becoming available.

The good news is that BDUK has agreed to review the questions raised over subsidy longevity between schemes and acknowledged that they could have done a better job of communicating all of this clearly with their suppliers.

Finally, it sounds like the agency are also going to put some extra effort, alongside suppliers and the responsible local authorities, into assessing whether FWA networks in such areas are delivering on their speed promises. This may include some visits to premises where there are understood to be issues.