The UK Internet Service Providers Association (ISPA) has called on the government to be “bold and brave” when they publish their new Planning and Infrastructure Bill (PIB) tomorrow, which it’s hoped may contain some measures that will benefit the roll-out of gigabit broadband and 4G / 5G mobile networks.
In case anybody has forgotten, the Labour Party’s 2024 General Election Manifesto (here) previously made clear that they would be making a “renewed push to fulfil the ambition of full gigabit and national 5G coverage by 2030.” This was later supported by the expression of a desire for more flexibility in the planning system (here), which might make it easier to deploy new digital infrastructure – those who oppose new telecoms poles and mobile masts will be watching closely.
Naturally, broadband and mobile operators have not been shy about producing their own wish lists for what this could mean (here, here and here), which often echo a strong desire for the full embracement of flexi-permits and the cancelling of plans for street works charging. Not to mention those that continue to push for easier access to run new fibre into large residential buildings (MDUs) and the many calls for greater infrastructure sharing.
Advertisement
Till Sommer, Head of Policy at ISPA UK, said:
“The rollout of full fibre gigabit broadband is one of the largest infrastructure projects of its generation, with our members already having invested more than £40bn to achieve gigabit connections in 85% of premises. While this is predominantly a private sector project, the Government is right to remove barriers to planning to facilitate the connectivity gains that will power the UK for decades to come.
The Bill is ambitious, especially when it comes to more traditional projects like power networks. We’d love to see the same action and ambition for broadband infrastructure. Now is the time to be bold and brave, turbocharging the existing permissive and competitive planning regime via flexi permits and greater cross-governmental support.
Futureproofing communications networks in this way will deliver significant economic and social benefits, and provide the foundation for the Government’s digital transformation agenda.”
Angela Rayner, Deputy Prime Minister and Housing Secretary, said:
“We’ve put growth at the heart of our plans as a government, with our Plan for Change milestone to secure 1.5 million homes and unleash Britain’s potential to build.
We need to reform the system to ensure it is sensible and balanced, and does not create unintended delays – putting a hold on people’s lives and harming our efforts to build the homes people desperately need.
New developments must still meet our high expectations to create the homes, facilities and infrastructure that communities need.”
However, so far most of the talk around the new Planning and Infrastructure Bill has tended to focus on other sectors, such as energy, housing and transport. At the same time, the government is also under pressure to restrict the deployment of certain types of digital infrastructure (here), such as metal and wood poles (telegraph / telecoms poles).
Suffice to say that while there is hope for some changes to boost digital infrastructure, it’s currently unclear precisely how much of the new bill will actually deliver on that.
Advertisement
Providing FFTP gigabit capable infrastructure should NOT include MULTIPLE OVERBUILD of said telecommunications infrastructure ,this serves little or no purpose . Choice of ISPs where gigabit capable FFTP infrastructure exists should only come about with the SHARING of that infrastructure .
Totally agree. Further Competition will only offer further opportunity now, for overseas ownership, leading to treating UK users as another cash cow – see pension funds and Thames water as a possible warning & example.
Too much of a good thing is as harmful as too little.
No. Nothing wrong with putting fibre cables into existing ducts or on existing poles.
Nothing wrong with digging new ducts if there’s no usable infrastructure.
Nothing wrong with poles here and there in areas with no usable infrastructure if ducts can’t be used or don’t make sense.
Don’t want to go back to monopoly where one company decides what gets sold and the price it gets sold at.
@stan why do you think overseas ownership is somehow less virtuous than ownership by the incompetent labour party?
I have no idea what you mean by pension funds since there are many choices out there but Thames water is awfully run precisely because it is a monopoly with no incentive to fix leaks or build reservoirs, so they make the government bail them out or cover their failures with consumption limits, price caps, preferential taxation and even bailouts
“Overbuild” as you call it allows competition. That is essential.
@Stan:
Have you looked at who owns the various AltNets? Have a look at CityFibre for a start.
Have you considered that more than 50pc of BT’s shares are held by overseas investors?
Just under half of the combined Vodafone UK/Three group will be held by one Chinese company alone.