View Full Version : EU/HMG/BDUK Broadband mud slinging
According to the FT, the EU has got a little annoyed about being 'blamed' for the delay in approving the UK state aid bid for broadband projects. According to the EU THEY asked for figures from HMG in February when the fabulous Jeremy *unt was in charge of DCMS, but it was not until October when Maria Miller had replaced him at DCMS that the figures were provided.
To quote the FT
"Joaquín Almunia, the EU’s competition commissioner, said “Brussels bureaucrats worked faster than their London colleagues” in clearing the way for state aid to hasten investment in high-speed internet services for rural areas.
His comments came as Ms Miller was singled out for criticism by other ministers in an acrimonious cabinet meeting on Tuesday when the prime minister tackled several departments over the government’s faltering economic growth efforts.
Expansion of superfast broadband to rural areas [/URL]is a key part of government efforts to increase investment in infrastructure and its push to make Britain the most advanced digital economy in Europe. But the rollout was delayed by a long wait for approval from Brussels for the government to pump £530m of state funds into the project. The green light was finally secured earlier this month.
Aides said Ms Miller responded to criticism in Tuesday’s cabinet meeting by highlighting “her intervention in Brussels” to bring “the rural broadband programme out from under stifling EU bureaucracy”.
Mr Almunia denied that Brussels foot-dragging was to blame. “Politicians on both sides of the Channel must avoid red tape, but the real origin of the delays ... should also be made clear,” he told the Financial Times. “We asked the UK government last February to supply the necessary information to us and only received a complete answer in October.”
A Whitehall aide said Ms Miller deserved credit for breaking the impasse since succeeding Jeremy Hunt as culture secretary in the September reshuffle. “Those that sit in the cabinet should be wary of criticising someone who is acknowledged as making significant headway on a vitally important infrastructure project, particularly when some of her male counterparts cannot make the same claims,” the aide said.
Ms Miller had “achieved more on broadband in the last two months ... than over the last two years”, the aide added."
Looks like a good hand-bagging for Jeremy and CMD!
Milo Minderbinder
29th Nov 2012, 20:57
Sounds like a lot of disinformation here
the main delay has been due to none of the potential contractors being interested in the deal the government was offering.
Only Fujitsu and BT really got involved in talks over it (everyone else ran away, quick) and Fujitsu pulled out nearly a year ago when they realised the requirments were unworkable
Since then, BT have picked up a couple of contracts - notably in rural Lancashire and parts of rural Cumbria, but tellingly......in areas where local pressure groups are / were making plans for their own infrastructure (e.g. B4RN in Bowland)
Essentially BT seem only interested where they see others as likely to put in a rival low-cost network
No, Milo - the delay has been in the approval of the UK schemes for the use of 'state aid' - 6 months. Not one of the BDUK framework local authorities have been able to progress talks with BT and only in the last 6 or so weeks have BT even been prepared to consider signing any contracts even if conditional on EU approval.
BT have far more than a 'couple' of contracts - so far they have all that have progressed to tenders.. Fujitsu did not 'pull out nearly a year ago' - they are still 'the other' bidder for contracts - except they have not actually placed any bids :)
Whether or not others may 'put in a rival low-cost network' will not affect the BDUK scheme since all providers have now declared where they will install networks in the next 3 years, including BT. (trust us......) and the scheme is designed to provide where 'others' (BT) don't (in theory).
Milo Minderbinder
29th Nov 2012, 22:27
"including BT. (trust us......)".......
???????
you MUST be taking the **** there
"you MUST be taking the **** there" - yes, 'TIC' they call it.
Regarding the HMG implementation of CMD's 'broadband plan' and JH's 'best b/b in Europe' err make that ''the fastest' you may wish to read up on the way state aid is involved in the scheme.
The delays due to BT are yet to come and in my view the 2015 target has well 'gone'..
The latest from 'la-la-land' (aka No10 and the EU) is that BDUK reckon that BT's roll-out of 'superfast broadband' (largely paid for by me and you) is 'box-ticked' as long as you 'feel' like you are getting 15mb. You cannot make this up!
BDUK uses Catch-22 to sideline altnets despite OK to 15Mbps (http://br0kent3l3ph0n3.wordpress.com/2013/10/14/bduk-uses-catch-22-to-sideline-altnets-despite-ok-to-15mbps/)
Surely its Openreach and not "BT" as such who are installing the UK's fibre network? http://http://www.expect.openreach.co.uk/
Why does no other organisation bid for these fibre contracts? I can only guess that there are no short-term gains to be made and the return on investment will only be seen in the long term?
mixture
14th Oct 2013, 09:02
Surely its Openreach and not "BT" a
Erm, you do realise Openreach are part of the BT umbrella don't you ! :ugh:
To be strictly accurate it is 'BT Openreach'. As to why they alone are doing it, you have a lot of history to catch up on and you will then see how they were the only bidder (conveniently?) left in the frame.
It is quite concerning how little the 'man in the street' actually knows of the process that has unfolded and how his expectations of 80mb are actually going to be a minimum of 'feeling like' 15mb (unless he is 'missed out' in which case he will get >=2).
To be strictly accurate it's Openreach - not BT Openreach. The Openreach Explained tab on the expect.openreach.co.uk website will tell you that.
Yes, Openreach is an independent company within the BT Group of companies in the same way that Virgin Atlantic, Virgin Media and Virgin Rail are all part of the Virgin Group. Completely separate companies.
mixture
16th Oct 2013, 06:36
Yes, Openreach is an independent company within the BT Group of companies in the same way that Virgin Atlantic, Virgin Media and Virgin Rail are all part of the Virgin Group. Completely separate companies.
Please, spare us the marketing bull* ! If we want to read that, we can just read the official BT line as published on their website.
You've obviously never had any real-life experience in the industry, because if you did, you would not be regurgitating the party line.
Nor can you viably compare a typical group structure (e.g. Virgin Atlantic, Virgin Media and Virgin Rail ) to BT. You obviously fail to grasp how intertwined the BT jungle is !
The regulator has no teeth, and hasn't even put their dentures in. The so-called "chinese walls" are just something BT put in place to keep the regulator quiet and stop them moaning...... a leopard doesn't change its spots though, and the majority of people with any sort of experience in the industry will relay their impression that the walls are paper thin.
Word it any way you like, BT are operating a monopoly in all but name. If you had any real-life experience, you would see how difficult, verging on impossible, it is to escape the grasp of their sticky fingers. This is reflected in their approach to business at all levels, Retail, Wholesale and Openreach.
Not just my opinion either. Even a solicitor I spoke recently came to this opinion after coming across through multiple dealings with BT whilst reviewing and negotiating contracts on behalf of large clients, he was simply left aghast at some things he encountered that I'm not at liberty to repeat here.
The thing that is enraging many folk (apart from the lack of '80mb' to all connections - remember those 'showers' of meteorites landing in the gardens of wide-eyed smiling families??)) is the way BT are blythely 'over-building' and treading on established 'private enterprise' networks despite the rules on state aid. Apart from the well-documented previous cases, a current classic is the situation with B4RN which has been steadily rolling out gigabit fibre to a lot of the more remote premises in the north-west - without subsidy - and now find BT 'mail-shooting' at least one of their areas and offering 'high-speed broadband' (laugh!) via FTTC (funded by you and me, of course), the area being one which BT had publicly stated they would not be supplying. To make matters worse, the company, B4RN, cannot seek private or RCBF funding for the 'missing 10%' areas since BT and councils are blocking release of the location of these - and it will be a couple of years before all are identified anyway. There are also significant issues for two broadband suppliers, one fibre and one wireless, on the Isle of Wight who claim that the Council has 'ignored' their significant presence during the award of the BDUK contract to BT - in contravention of state aid rules again - and I believe this situation exists over the whole country. These companies, incidentally, are seeking no or minimal exteranl funding to cover the island, whereas the IoW council are spending £6million of taxpayers money on BT with no 'guarantees' of service.
The EU rules for use of state aid are clear. It cannot be used to fund areas with existing suppliers and must not be used in a way which adversely impacts on other suppliers and their business. Even more annoying is the fact that nearly all the 'alternative' suppliers are offering genuine 'high speed' broadband (40mb or more, up to 1gb) in contrast to the BT product. One line in Ewhurst in Surrey is sweltering in a 1.4mb BT FTTC connection due to line problems............................. BT of course, have no obligation to improve a line above that required for voice and fax. Some customers on BT Infinity are finding that the old ADSL will deliver better speeds due to the greater losses at the higher frequencies. This of course brings into question another EU 'rule' that state aid must only be used to provide a 'step change' in speeds. I guess as long as you 'feel 'a step change that is ok?? It is hinging on farcical.
Another interesting (and widely predicted) happening is that some of the '20mb' satellite services are often dropping to 1mb or less at peak times. I read, for example, of Tooway's system slowing up badly occasionally, and I did use a friend's Tooway connection at 1630 one day and found it very slow. It is, after all, quite difficult to shin up a pole and put another aerial on a satellite.
Buyers/taxpayers beware!
Mixture:
36 years in the telecoms industry including BT Wholesale & BT Retail, now with an independent supplier. I can assure you that your paper thin walls are very robust indeed. I suspect that, if you've never worked within the BT Group it is hard to comprehend the independence of the businesses that make up that group these days.
Anyway, no-one has yet explained why no other network supplier has been able to commit to developing the fibre network alongside/in competition with Openreach.
EGTE =- refer post #9 As to why they alone are doing it, you have a lot of history to catch up on and you will then see how they were the only bidder (conveniently?) left in the frame.PLEASE study the way the BDUK process (it is all documented) and you might be tempted to think there was a long-term intent behind it. If, when you look at the conditions for being a 'bidder' and you still don't understand.........
mixture
20th Oct 2013, 04:19
Anyway, no-one has yet explained why no other network supplier has been able to commit to developing the fibre network alongside/in competition with Openreach.
Probably because of the disgusting way BT are treating the competition, as BOAC goes on to explain, and as is also explained by the recent interrogation of BT by a parliamentary committee, some interesting revelations there.