Home
 » ISP News » 
Sponsored Links

Acrimony as UK Parliament Debate Use of Telegraph Poles for Broadband

Friday, Oct 18th, 2024 (9:51 am) - Score 4,120
telegraph_pole_cbt_fttp_engineer_from_openreach

The previous government did attempt to change the ATI Regs in order to require more infrastructure sharing, but this didn’t proceed because some smaller and more vulnerable networks (altnets) said they were concerned about the risk of “unintended consequences” if changes to those rules ended up undermining their investment case (here). Such operators also expressed “limited interest in using non-Openreach or non-telecoms infrastructure” (i.e. it’s hard to beat Openreach’s regulated product).

In addition, several MPs then called on the Government to adopt a different approach that would still make it easy to deploy poles in hard-to-reach rural areas, albeit while making it harder to build them in more urban locations. But that would run the risk of disincentivising many operators from many such investments in the first place.

The Government response

The UK Government’s Minister for Telecoms, Sir Chris Bryant, responded to the debate with a fairly well-rounded summary and update on their plans. In particular, Chris noted that “the vast majority of companies operating in this sphere are doing so entirely responsibly“, before adding that “a few are behaving like cowboys” and “drinking in the last chance saloon“. But he also “encouraged competitors to tell the two or three companies that are not playing by the rules that they are bringing all of them into disrepute“.

Advertisement

Just to recap. The new Labour-led government, much like the old Conservative-led one, previously called on broadband operators to “end the deployment of unnecessary telegraph poles” (here), to “share existing infrastructure when installing broadband cables as the default approach” and pledged to “revise” the existing Code of Practice (as linked earlier).

Sir Chris yesterday also told parliament that he could “perfectly understand” why a commercial operator might not want to share their infrastructure with a competitor, which he said is the reason why producing the new Code of Conduct “has taken a while“.

NOTE: INCA’s separate Infrastructure Sharing Group (ISG) is currently trying to bring altnets together to foster more pole, duct and cabinet space sharing (here), although we don’t yet know what practical outputs that will deliver.

Sir Chris Bryant (MP), UK Telecoms Minister, said:

I will be very clear: the vast majority of companies operating in this sphere are doing so entirely responsibly. They are doing a great favour for the nation in rolling out broadband of the kind of speed that everybody wants. I note the point that my hon. Friend the Member for Stourbridge (Cat Eccles) made about other countries in Europe; of course we aspire to that coverage for everybody across the UK.

The vast majority of companies are operating responsibly but, frankly, a few are behaving like cowboys. As a Government and as a Parliament, I think we sometimes need to say to cowboys that they are drinking in the last chance saloon. I have made that abundantly clear to some of the operators. I know that some operators are striving to co-operate with one another and with BT Openreach to ensure that no unnecessary street furniture suddenly appears and that there is full consultation with the local community before a road is dug up for a new duct or a new pole appears. Companies that are abiding by the code of conduct and fulfilling their obligations are almost as fed up as my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Northfield and other hon. Friends; indeed, I am sure we could fill the whole Chamber with hon. Members who are equally fed up with the few companies that are bringing the whole system into disrepute.

That matters, because in the end the most important thing is that the wider strategy is right. We want to deliver good-value, very high-speed, more than ultrafast, gigabit-capable broadband based on fibre to the whole UK as fast as possible without having to provide vast amounts of taxpayers’ money. We therefore need to do so on the basis of commercial roll-out. Of course it is right that that should not be on the basis of monopoly and that competition, where possible, should drive choice for consumers and cheaper prices. That part of the strategy is absolutely right.

The part of the strategy that the previous Government were a bit more relaxed about—in fact, Ministers used to say categorically that they were completely relaxed about it—was overbuild. That has meant several companies digging up the road one after another, as has happened in some parts of the country. It has also meant several companies deciding that they need their own set of poles, or poles appearing in an area that had never previously had poles and in which ducts had been laid out but not used.

I am not completely relaxed about overbuild. I am concerned about it, because I know that a lot of constituents up and down the land are concerned. However, I want to make sure that commercial operators that are abiding by the rules and the code of conduct have every opportunity to continue to do so, in order that their commercial investments are not disrupted unnecessarily and we can deliver the infrastructure that we need across the whole United Kingdom. In the end, I want the cheapest possible prices for people and the highest possible capacity across the network for every property in the land. I would issue one slight corrective in this debate. Sometimes people say that this is a battle between urban and rural, but in fact some of the issues in urban areas are completely different from those in rural areas, and some are identical. I am not sure whether that dichotomy is fair.

My preference is for ducts wherever possible. That is not always possible, for a whole series of different logistical reasons in different areas. It is an undeniable fact that providing connectivity via poles is likely to be something like 10 times cheaper than doing it via ducts, so I fully understand why commercial operators want to install poles. I understand that that could mean that there will be poles in areas that have never had them before, and, in some areas, that is something that we will have to live with.

Questions naturally remain over what practical changes the new Code of Practice will actually deliver, since any overly burdensome changes risk increasing the costs of deployment for operators and thus potentially reducing their roll-out plans (i.e. causing a negative impact on the government’s coverage targets). But we do anticipate that it will most likely result in a need for greater pre-build consultation with communities, as well as some improvements to the complaints process.

The catch here is that Ofcom has very limited powers in this area (here), so it may take more than this to have much of an impact. The regulator is currently investigating a related pole issue with Brsk in Manchester (here), but that is for a rare and specific issue that seems unlikely to impact many (or any) other deployments across the UK.

Advertisement

However, I am absolutely clear that if voluntary adherence does not work, we reserve the right to change the law. We are in earnest about that, because we are aware of the concerns people have expressed,” said Sir Chris Bryant while referencing the possibility that PD rights could be removed from pole deployments. But we’d hope this would, if ever enacted, be a targetted and temporary sanction, not industry-wide, as the latter would be suicidal for investment and coverage plans.

Finally, Sir Chris said that he expected the new code of conduct would be “published in the early new year,” at the “very latest“, so it sounds like we won’t be seeing this surface by the end of 2024. The difficulty here remains in finding the right balance, and we must not forget the voices of those who don’t care what type of infrastructure is used, just so long as they can access the gigabit broadband service they want. Such voices are often overlooked and are sometimes fearful of speaking out, particularly when neighbours may be outside protesting a very different point of view.

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 X (Twitter), Mastodon, Facebook, BlueSky, Threads.net and .
Search ISP News
Search ISP Listings
Search ISP Reviews
Comments
26 Responses

Advertisement

  1. Avatar photo john says:

    The fibre roll out has been a good example of what can be achieved if you get rid of unnecessary red tape and take away the power of NIMBYs to block everything. It’s a test for the new government because they are going to have face down far sterner opposition than this if they want to reform planning laws in order to meet their housing targets.

    1. Avatar photo Joyce Whittle says:

      The red tape was there to protect against the exploitation that many of the code operators are using within permitted development for telecommunications installations ,voluntary codes of practise and non adherence to ECC (2003) to install UNNECESSARY infrastructure rather than seek to share infrastructure . Lack of planning or regulation of the telecommunications industry has led to the chaotic overbuild of infrastructure , Rather than addressing areas without the connectivity or in the guise of providing choice of ISPs which could have been addressed without triple or more of infrastructure

    2. Avatar photo - says:

      Honestly in a ideal world as an ISP I’d like to use somebody elses’ pole at a sensible price for my build, but do I want to sell access to mine to another ISP? Ideally not, unless it’s reciprocal.

      This is the main issue, nobody *wants* to share their infrastructure for a fair price, so we put in our own poles. I’ve looked into using electricity company poles and so on under ATI but it’s way more hassle than it’s worth, planting a pole costs £550~ all in, even negotiating ATI for 100 poles(inc system to notify, integrate GIS, train staff, be billed/correct bills etc) – it’s cheaper to just get on and install new ones ourselves.

      Similar story for other ISPs, we tried getting duct access to duct put in with BDUK money (we are building without) and it was 2K to get access and 29p metre a year per 4mm duct.. with PIA we get 25mm can install 20X the fibre per duct and it costs much less? Dark fibre is a even more insane story.

    3. Avatar photo Witcher says:

      Look forward to responses in the comments from: https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2024/10/ms3-begin-trial-to-run-fttp-broadband-via-kcoms-poles-in-hull-uk.html

      You keep quoting the ECC and other things so given you’ve been at this for a year and more I’m sure you can answer my layman points and show me where I’m wrong.

    4. Avatar photo anonymous says:

      John, “NIMBYS” – a divisive labelling project by people who take offence at others who do not agree with their plans without asking what the reasons are and seeing if they can be alleviated.

      Secondly, your comment, “and take away the power of NIMBYs to block everything”, THAT is what an authoritarian state would do and not a modern democratic one.

      Politicians, councillors and backhanders – you want them to be able to do what they want wherever they want under the guise of spill that everyone benefits…hmmmmmmm

  2. Avatar photo anon says:

    The only reason they prefer poles is money. They use the cheapest easiest option to spread their network as fast as possible so they can sell their company off, its all a quick cash grab.

    If they were serious about providing a network and service, they would prefer underground cabling as it is more cost effective long term.

    Anything else they say other than cost is just irrelevant PR speak.
    Nobody would care for a few days of road works on their street if they knew what it was for, short term disruption is better than long term.
    Poles having always existed is also a null point, upgrading the countries telecoms network is the perfect time to live in the present and do the job properly.

    1. Avatar photo Jonathan says:

      Given that it can take weeks to repair a downed telegraph pole perhaps if “incentives” were put in place to make repairs take place much quicker they would be less likely to go for the cheap upfront method. Basically at the moment they are incentivised to put the cost of your broadband being down for days on the consumer.

    2. Avatar photo Joyce Whittle says:

      Totally Agree . It seems odd that for the last 50 years or more telecommunications infrastructure has been installed increasingly underground and now it’s considered progress to install multiples of telegraph poles

    3. Avatar photo Aidan Paul says:

      Untrue. Poles are cheaper over the lifetime of fibre.

    4. Avatar photo Fastman says:

      Anon the cost differential between a pole and.an underground solution is around 2 to 3 time more expensive to do the underground .you paying the difference then

    5. Avatar photo anon says:

      It is true, underground infrastructure is considerably less prone to damage. Poles are useful for the last percent of homes, the super rural ones, but underground should be the de facto standard for infrastructure. Defending poles in situations where they dont make sense is crazy to me. You can wait another 6 months for your fibre, we dont need to take shortcuts because a minority wants their fibre and they want it now!

      Also fibre rollout should have been treated as a utilty, with only one cable being run to each home.

    6. Avatar photo 125us says:

      It’s not about waiting 6 months anon, it’s about whether it gets delivered at all. Margins are thin. If you put in place rules that make it cost three times as much to deliver to a property then that property doesn’t get fibre.

      Network rollouts are funded by investors who want to see a return. If you increase the cost so that they don’t have any prospect of a return they’ll put their money elsewhere.

    7. Avatar photo anonymous says:

      As always the devil in detail. Places served by grass verges owned by council/highways/state are easy to micro trench and whilst there is a bit of cost over just pole mounting, it could be used in part to get cable from pole to pole rather than strewn across long lengths that sag. So roads with grass verge all along one side for example, cables could be micro trenched and buried, even if the final drop wire is from a pole. It all helps to reduce clutter of wiring.

      Another scenario, I’ve seen Brokenreach do a fibre feed to another CBT on another pole by running a cable from the feeding pole. Usually a pole will have its own independent feed from existing underground route, but some areas and local engineers do the quickest route and the result is spaghetti wiring on a once clean road.

    8. Avatar photo Phil says:

      Exactly, the whole point of moving from Copper to FTTP is to bring about an improvement. As the Internet is becoming a vital service, then upgrading copper should mean if its overhead it goes to being underground, especially given all the talk about climate change and worsening weather, well if that is true then legislation should be in place to ensure new infrastructure is as climate change proof as possible.

      Also we don’t put gas or water pipes over head, and electricity is almost always underground, granted some houses do have overhead supplies, but its a very small fraction and all new installations are underground.

      Then on top of all that sensibility, many people don’t like them, especially if they were not there before.

  3. Avatar photo Jonathan says:

    The solution is IMHO simple. If the existing phone service is provided by telegraph poles then a few more is fine. If the existing phone service is underground then you need planning permission to put in telegraph poles.

    1. Avatar photo 125us says:

      The result will be simple too. Operators won’t apply for planning permission, they’ll just rollout fibre to other places instead.

    2. Avatar photo anonymous says:

      That’s where an effective regulator could step in. Too much of cherry picking going on, and many easy places have 2/3/4+ operators and others (not talking of remote locations) have nothing.

    3. Avatar photo 125us says:

      That’s not regulation, that’s competition. Operators are free to deploy network wherever they believe they can make a return. Overbuild is a sign of the market working properly. Anything else would suggest collusion or non-compete arrangements which break the Competition Act and tend to get people sent to prison.

  4. Avatar photo Jimmy says:

    “now it’s considered progress to install multiples of telegraph poles” – where on earth is that the case?

    Talking of burying everything, I’m so glad that the parent of the NTL did so well…. oh apart from going majorly bust.

    1. Avatar photo anonymous says:

      They didn’t have micro-trenching equipment back then which is much easier and cheaper to do.

  5. Avatar photo Midfield General says:

    DSIT are branding activists in the same way as 5G conspiracy theorists.

    The lady at connected britain was rolling her eyes at having to attend.

    The Government won’t stop anything and will alienate people who try to challenge.

  6. Avatar photo Groucho says:

    Some of the poles rushed into place where I live are already starting to lean. They have so many cables attached it was bound to happen. The cables are covering a far greater distance than they should. This is obvious to anyone just looking. All down to cost I suppose, and sod the end result.

  7. Avatar photo Andy Cadman says:

    Where I live we have had Openreach underground cables and wooden poles presumably since the GPO rolled out the phone network. We then had Nynex lay a load of underground cables before going bust and being taken over by Virgin. So we already have one hybrid cable and pole and one cable only network. Now IXL are putting up their own set of poles. These form a cats cradle with Openreach’s cables as Openreach’s are often crossing the roads while IXL’s are running parallel to the roads. It looks like some third world mess. It seems very unlikely that there is sufficient business to support 3 broadband supplies so I guess one may go bust like Nynex did leaving their infrastructure to rot where it stands or lies depending on who goes bust.

    1. Avatar photo Witcher says:

      NYNEX didn’t go bust, Andy. They were merged into Cable and Wireless Communications and bought by ntl. ntl went into Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the USA but did not go bust. Shareholders were basically wiped out and creditors took over the company.

      IXL – are you talking about IX Wireless? They haven’t behaved well at all: they are in the minority and I’m sorry your area has had them do that. Most would’ve used the existing Openreach poles. They don’t as they’ve specific requirements leaving them about the only altnet for whom it might be cheaper in the short-medium term to build their own than use Openreach.

    2. Avatar photo ISP worker says:

      IX Wireless is awful. They go by many other names such as Opus and the dreadfully misleading 6G Internet. They’re a company as old as Time (hint to their origin).

      As for poles vs underground, as a former fault manager for an ISP, the overhead FTTP is the most unreliable part of the networks as the poles are vulnerable to vehicular damage, wear and tear (they rot and can be deemed unsafe to climb), and repairs can take weeks, and that’s before we talk about how storm damage can take weeks to resolve if the suppliers have to apply for an A55 off the local authority.

      Underground is more disruptive to put in, but once it’s in, it’s in and provided decent materials are used to create the ducts, there isn’t much need to excavate the lines again.

      What I don’t like, however, is how many ISPs seem to be running their own kit in a given area. Someone I know has Virgin, Openreach, Cityfibre, and Grain, who have all installed their own separate network underground, in the last 18 months. There’s no off road parking, so it’s a nightmare down her street when the networks want to roll out.

  8. Avatar photo zzing123 says:

    How does a member of the public lay their own cable in an Openreach duct to connect any two buildings?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

NOTE: Your comment may not appear instantly (it may take several hours) due to static caching or random moderation checks by the anti-spam system.
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.
Cheap BIG ISPs for 100Mbps+
Community Fibre UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
Virgin Media UK ISP Logo
Virgin Media £22.99
132Mbps
Gift: None
Vodafone UK ISP Logo
Vodafone £24.00 - 26.00
150Mbps
Gift: None
NOW UK ISP Logo
NOW £24.00
100Mbps
Gift: None
Plusnet UK ISP Logo
Plusnet £25.99
145Mbps
Gift: £50 Reward Card
Large Availability | View All
Cheapest ISPs for 100Mbps+
Gigaclear UK ISP Logo
Gigaclear £17.00
200Mbps
Gift: None
Community Fibre UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
Virgin Media UK ISP Logo
Virgin Media £22.99
132Mbps
Gift: None
Hey! Broadband UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
Youfibre UK ISP Logo
Youfibre £23.99
150Mbps
Gift: None
Large Availability | View All
The Top 15 Category Tags
  1. FTTP (6024)
  2. BT (3639)
  3. Politics (2720)
  4. Business (2439)
  5. Openreach (2405)
  6. Building Digital UK (2330)
  7. Mobile Broadband (2144)
  8. FTTC (2083)
  9. Statistics (1899)
  10. 4G (1814)
  11. Virgin Media (1763)
  12. Ofcom Regulation (1582)
  13. Fibre Optic (1467)
  14. Wireless Internet (1462)
  15. 5G (1405)
Promotion
Sponsored

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