100m broadband by 2017 - wonder if it's an idea or a promise?

[Inkblot]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8489870.stm

Apologies if this has been posted before.

Mr Osborne told the BBC's Andrew Marr Show: "In the 19th Century we built the railways, in the 20th Century we built the motorways, in the 21st Century let's build the super-fast broadband network that will create hundreds of thousands of jobs for Britain."

Hundreds of thousands of jobs? Sounds a bit optimistic!

[Glenn]

Unless there is serious investment, then it will be a pipe dream, I think.

[Rik]

It's a bit of electioneering, I fear.

[talos]

No mistaking the fact it's election time again   lock up your babies

[Rik]

Wives and daughters...

[talos]

And get receipts for the expenses

[Technical Ben]

We already have this. Hence it's already achieved.
One home in some random place gets 100mb connection. 
Hence why no numbers or figures are promised. A bit like BT "up to 8mb!".

[chrisga]

I'll eat my hat (and I'll have to go out an buy one first) if  I  even have 21CN at  my exchange by 2017, let alone 100m.

Going forward, a decent broadband infrastructure is  pre requisite for a  healthy economy.   You can't  therefore criticise  the actual words being uttered.  However,  sticking in  some fibre optic cabling is  not some kind of  "cure all" - You need  dynamic companies and a decent business ethic  as well.

You just get the feeling that the "spin Dr's" have told them to "whitter on"  about  " 'puters 'n' stuff"  to show they have  their "fingers on the pulse" of modern technology.  

[Rik]

I'd agree with every word, Chris, it's soundbite politics - and to think we have another 3-4 months of it to come.  

[colonelsun]

2017?

The politicians still don't get it. By 2017 the slowest speeds in the world will be Osbourne's target, Korea is already talking of speeds in gigabytes ( the wrong spelling i'm betting).

And using the BBC licence fee as a cash cow to provide broadband for rural areas means the dilution of the licence fee, which was originally for radio and tv for all. Once you break the historic basis for having the licence fee... then government will dip into it for anything and everything rather than use government funding. The BBC licence fee is for tv and radio and not as a quick fix for the UK broadband industry and to make the government look good in international surveys.

I do like the idea of depriving BT of using the old copper lines as a cash cow though.

[Rik]

I suppose you could argue that the BBC are one of the primary sources of mainstream BB use, through the iPlayer?

[dujas]

I think building a new fibre network is pure fantasy. The only way the numbers work is if by "majority", George Osborne means 51%+ of UK households having access to BT's FTTC/FTTH (BT will cover 40% by 2012 according to their schedule, at a cost of £1.5 Billion).

3.5% of the BBC's licence fee would be around £122 Million, but I assume it wouldn't be start to be taken until the digital TV switch-over completes in 2012, giving them only five years to make it happen before their deadline. So that's a £610 Million subsidy to BT to take their FTTC coverage beyond 50%.

That's already less than the £175 Million that what would be collected yearly via Labour's Telephone line tax (which the Conservatives would scrap if they formed the next Government).

It is estimated that it would cost BT in the region of £5-7 Billion to provide FTTC/FTTH to 95%+ of UK households.

[kinmel]

As you say the figures are pure fantasy, but at least they are starting to talk about reining in the TV ownership Tax.

Who knows one day the BBC may actually be pushed back to being about public service radio and tv.

[Rik]

We can but hope, Alan.

[colonelsun]

And as a High Court decision noted in the dying days of Tony Blair's reign, a pre election pledge or promise has no foundation in law. The law sees the pre election and post election dates as 2 distinctly different moments in time.

I can't recall who took their local MP to court to get him to honour his pre election pledges that resulted in the above decision, but as far as i'm concerned Osbourne's pledges are just as worthless as Cameron's or Brown's.

[dujas]

Sounds like he''ll threaten BT to motivate them as well:

"If there are some parts of the country where the market can't get to; because I think the best way to deliver this is by breaking up the British Telecom monopoly at the moment which holds back companies like Carphone Warehouse or Virgin. If we find the market can't do that, then use the BBC licence fee, the digital switchover money in the licence fee, to get broadband out to the rest of the country, but let's see first of all if we can have the market delivering that super-fast broadband."

Source

At least the two main parties recognise the need for some form of public investment in our Broadband infrastructure, however both seem to have no idea of what they are talking about

[john]

I think the best way to deliver this is by breaking up the British Telecom monopoly at the moment which holds back companies like Carphone Warehouse

I don't think they need to break up BT to do this, Carphone Warehouse has shown itself to be perfectly capable of holding itself back 

[D-Dan]

Without trying to be political about this, the same party that wants to put x% of license fee money into superfast BB is the same party that wants to dismantle the BBC.

Now I may have this wrong, but if you kill the cow, where is the cash coming from?

Steve

[john]

Now I may have this wrong, but if you kill the cow, where is the cash coming from?

The same place that it always ultimately comes from Steve, the taxpayer.

[Glenn]

There is a little more info here http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/01/osborne_marr/

[Rik]

For once I agree with an Osborne suggestion, break the Openreach monopoly.

[kinmel]

The BBC should be told they will lose 25% of the TV owner tax from 2014 and the money be used to install fibre to the home, preferably through sewers where possible.

The Government should split the country into zones and then invite private contractors to bid for whichever zones they wish for. The winning bid should be to the contractor offering the lowest pre-user cost, fixed for 10 years.

Those zones without bids, or excessively high bids should be subsidised from the TV Owner tax to make bidding attractive, different zones will need different subsidies.

The 4 years until 2014 can be used to allocate the zones and allow the industry to prepare to start on day 1.  Installations not completed in an agreed time frame will lose 10% subsidy each year late.

[Rik]

Sounds good to me, Alan. Congrats on the 3000.

[Glenn]

The BBC should be told they will lose 25% of the TV owner tax from 2014 and the money be used to install fibre to the home, preferably through sewers where possible.

If they did that, they they would be up to their necks in s***

[Rik]