Time for a Broadband Shake-Up? the Case for Reform of the UK’S Digital Communications Market
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
_ Time for a broadband shake-up? The case for reform of the UK’s digital communications market A discussion paper by Victoria Read Contents Preface 1. Executive summary 2 2. Introduction 6 3. Context 9 4. Is there a case for market reform? 18 5. What next? 26 6. Conclusion and recommendations 33 Preface GovernUp is an independent research project set up in 2014. GovernUp brings together senior politicians of all parties, former civil servants, Whitehall advisers and business leaders to consider the far-reaching reforms needed in Whitehall and beyond to enable more effective and efficient government. GovernUp is working to: Produce a rigorous body of evidence to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the current system of government; Generate radical but workable solutions to the long-term challenges that require reforms; and; Shape public debate and build a new cross-party consensus on reform, based on the conclusions of our research. This discussion paper This discussion paper was authored by Victoria Read, a policy and public affairs consultant with 15 years’ experience in the telecoms, media and technology sectors. She was previously Executive Director of the Commercial Broadcasters Association and Head of Government Affairs at the social network Bebo. She has also held policy positions with the Broadband Stakeholder Group and the Publishers Association. GovernUp’s digital communications project has been supported by Vodafone UK. Advisory Board GovernUp’s Advisory Board is co-chaired by Rt Hon Nick Herbert MP and Rt Hon Dame Margaret Hodge MP and consists of senior politicians of all parties, former civil servants, Whitehall advisers and business leaders. Members of the Advisory Board offer their expertise and insight to inform GovernUp’s work. They have no responsibility for the project’s governance, nor do they necessarily endorse the proposals of GovernUp, its research projects, or discussion papers. GovernUp Further information about GovernUp, including discussion papers produced by the other research projects and a list of members of the Advisory Board, can be found at www.governup.org. GovernUp is an initiative of the Project for Modern Democracy, a company limited by guarantee no. 8472163 and a registered charity in England and Wales no. 1154924. 1 Executive summary 1. A debate is raging about how to ensure that the UK has a digital infrastructure that is fit to meet its future connectivity needs. In one camp, led by BT, is the view that we are already on the right path: with superfast broadband due to be available to 95 per cent of the UK by 20171, today’s digital Britain is viewed as a “success story”2; BT has a plan for the future – and the means to deliver it – provided the UK sticks to its current policy and regulatory approach. 2. In the other camp, led by BT’s competitors3 but also joined by new digital infrastructure investors and business groups, lies a deep frustration that the network we have today is under-delivering, and a fear that plans for the future – which centre on BT rolling out their new copper-fibre hybrid technology (G.fast), rather than taking fibre directly to the premises (FTTP) – is woefully unambitious. Unless we radically change direction, the UK risks becoming a second class digital nation or worse. Somewhere between these two camps are consumers, who are less interested in markets or network structure than whether their connectivity needs are met by a market that offers choice, competitive prices and good quality of service. 3. Being on the right path is mission critical to the UK’s economic future and we are currently at an important fork in the road. Ofcom is conducting a once-in-a-decade strategic review4 of the market and has placed a range of options on the table – some which stick to or tinker with the existing plan, others which represent a change in direction, including separating BT from Openreach, its network arm. Next steps are to be announced in early 2016 and there are strong arguments to say that one of those steps should be a referral to the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). 4. Ofcom must take this “momentous decision”5 in difficult circumstances. The landscape has changed radically since it designed the current regulatory framework in 20056. Data consumption is surging; expectations for ubiquitous connectivity are rising; the fixed telecoms market is blurring into adjacent mobile and content markets; and new entrants are challenging assumptions about where investment and competition is possible. 1John Whittingdale, Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, 18 November 2015: http://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2015/11/john-whittingdale-mp-we-are-making-real-progress-on- superfast.html 2 Delivering Britain’s Digital Future, BT 3 For the purpose of this paper “BT’s competitors” refers to the ISPs who use BT Openreach as wholesale customers, although BT has other competitors in the TV market and will shortly also compete in the mobile market, post the BT/EE merger. 4 Ofcom, Digital Communications Review: Promoting competition and investment in converged digital communications services: http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/telecoms/policy/digital-comms-review/ 5 As described by the BBC’s Rory Cellan-Jones, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-34972702 6 Ofcom, Final statements on the Strategic Review of Telecommunications, and undertakings in lieu of a reference under the Enterprise Act 2002 Statement: http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/752417/statement/statement.pdf 2 Everyone agrees that a fit for purpose network is needed, with the right levels of investment and competition, but views diverge about how to best achieve this. 5. In the view of reformers, the current market structure is fundamentally flawed. A vertically integrated (if functionally separate) BT Openreach is simply not incentivised to deliver the investment and competition required for the network we need for the future. They point to the following warning bells as proof: a. Despite the Openreach network generating healthy profits and receiving public subsidies to deliver broadband in hard to reach parts of the UK, BT’s investment in the network has been as “flat as a pancake”7. This has resulted in a poor quality of service for both retail and wholesale customers at a time when other parts of BT Group are aggressively pursuing expensive sports TV rights and will most likely have its purchase of the UK’s largest mobile operator, EE, approved shortly. b. While BT may be investing heavily in G.fast, it is expenditure on a technology that has a limited shelf life; it will help the UK to stay near the top of the leader board for speed and coverage in the short-term, but nations who are investing in FTTP now will achieve similar coverage and take-up in due course but with a superior network, leaving the UK to play an expensive catch up game. c. Vertical integration has helped BT to secure upwards of 70 per cent8 of connections in the emerging superfast broadband market on the Openreach network, putting it on track to regain a monopoly position and reversing the competition stimulated in 2005. 6. BT forcefully disputes this analysis, describing the evidence as “unfounded”9 and the alleged discrimination as impossible given the regulations in place. Instead it insists it has the UK’s best interests at heart, pointing to the “vital role”10 BT played in the transformation of the UK’s broadband since 2005 and its commitment to “forge an ultrafast future for the UK and to deliver faster broadband and better service to every property in the country.”11 7 Sky Director of Communications Lyssa McGowan speaking at the Parliament and Internet Conference 29 October 2015, http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/10/29/bt_openreach_boss_says_uk_telco_market_needs_predictable_regulation/ 8 According to Ofcom, as of Q1 2015, BT had 36% of superfast broadband connections (Virgin had 49%) but accounted for 44% of net superfast broadband additions, p 29, Ofcom DCR Discussion Document http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/dcr_discussion/summary/digital-comms-review.pdf, TalkTalk puts the number at 70% in its October 2015 DCR response http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/dcr_discussion/responses/TalkTalk.pdf Vodafone puts the number at 72% in its October 2015 DCR response: http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/dcr_discussion/responses/Vodafone.pdf Sky puts the number at 74% in its October 2015 DCR response: http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/dcr_discussion/responses/Sky.pdf 9http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/dcr_discussion/responses/BT.pdf 10 Delivering Britain’s Digital Future, BT 11 Delivering Britain’s Digital Future, BT 3 7. Attracting all the headlines, as a solution to the alleged problems, is the structural separation of BT and Openreach. BT and its supporters say that the UK is best served by vertical integration (which brings BT Group’s funds, scale and innovation to the table) and a stable regulatory environment (which gives investors confidence to commit the substantial capital required). They argue that the upheaval caused by separation would jeopardise BT and others’ future investment plans, while failing to resolve the core complaints12. 8. Others say that stability would be fine if the market was working well (but it is not) and that preserving Openreach’s access to BT Group’s funds would be worthwhile if it had a history of making the most of that access (but it does not). Critics argue that BT Group is benefiting more from owning Openreach (with Openreach contributing to 41.5 per cent of BT Group’s EBITDA in the year to March 201513) than the Openreach network and its customers benefit from BT’s ownership.