The government plans to direct Ofcom (the first it has ever done this) to implement the, glamorously titled, Wireless Spectrum Modernisation Programme. Through it, The Digital Dividend is about to become a reality, as analogue TV is switched off by the end of 2011. You, civil servants, parliamentarians and their researchers look on, slightly bemused, as those of us who live and breathe spectrum (it is thin air after all…) thrash out the GHz, the MHz, The LTE’s, The WiMax, the DVB T2’s, and all that go with them. All too often, the debate bypasses why these kinds of issues are crucial to Mr. Joe Voter, why real parliamentary engagement is so important and why UK Citizens need representation. Part of this process is making these issues understandable for those representatives.

So why is spectrum, and by implication the digital dividend, so important to your every day man, or woman, on the street? (more…)

Despite what my colleagues may think, I really do make an effort to keep my desk clear. It’s becoming increasingly difficult. The government is simply producing so much paper on telecoms at the moment. There are no less than five meaty consultations, a select committee inquiry and, lets not forget, the mighty tome that is the Digital Britain report, (along with its little brother, the Digital Britain implementation plan), all stacked up and teetering over into my neighbours territory. I have added first and second draft responses. On Friday, the whole stack of paper fell on my foot. It hurt.

So is my bruised toe worth it? Or, more specifically, is all this frantic policy making actually producing the end results we hoped for? Well, from a legislative perspective, things are definitely moving along well. We are hearing reassuring noises that despite the upcoming general election, the digital economy bill is taking shape broadly as we hoped it would and there isn’t much appetite for playing around with it in parliament. The much hyped “broadband tax’”is likely to make it into the finance bill. An additional statutory duty for Ofcom (“to promote efficient investment”) is almost certainly on the way. If they can work out what “efficient” actually means, this can only be good. Although, DCMS seems to have got jealous and decided that it wants to add a duty for Ofcom as well, probably without consulting. Anything BIS can do DCMS can do better. Whitehall in action.

On the negative side, there appears to be, much to industries concern, clear momentum for ISPs to be required to cut off their customers for sharing files illegally. I have great respect for right-holders. In another life, perhaps I could have created some content worth possessing the rights to… But the fact remains that industry, or ISPs, are effectively being contracted out as a law enforcement agency. There is absolutely no direct benefit, or proposed recompense, for them under these proposals. Instead, they incur huge additional admin costs and may well lose revenue as well. Right holders share none of this burden. That is apart from the fact that the whole system is likely to be unenforceable and likely to be superseded by the Telecoms framework directive, which, dogged by infamous “Amendement 138″ controversy, is currently grinding its way through Brussels as we speak.

We also wonder where all the non-legislative (or partially legislative) proposals are going. Already, large elements of the Digital Britain spectrum modernisation programme are probably going to need to be looked at again. T-Mobile and Orange, unless the competition commission intervenes, are to merge. This means that Kip Meeks valuable work, which Mandleson recently got involved with and was near to completion, will most likely be delayed and revised. While the government hasn’t missed its target yet, the ‘arms length’ entity responsible for procuring the capabilities to deliver a 2Mb/s USC currently has no CEO and hasn’t been formally established. We hope that whoever is appointed will talk to industry in a language it understands. Not quite time to worry, but the way the procurement is run is crucial.

Then there are the Tories. We still don’t really know (apart from the short term point scoring we saw immediately post publication) where they stand. The vaunted Review of the Creative Industries appears no closer to publication. This could all be for nothing if they choose to take a different direction on all these issues. Apart from the fact that we are last starting to get some coherency and traction on these issues in Government, this would mean a new wodge of paper hitting my desk. And a visit from HR about health and safety and Intellects ‘clear desk’ policy. I think I will just blame the government. I normally do.

Although it may feel longer with all this sunshine (bar the recent tropical-style action) and long summer nights, it’s been a little over three weeks since the launch of Digital Britain. In this time we’ve seen the appearance of the Digital Economy Bill on the legislative programme for next term and today, an announcement from BT detailing the initial stages of their FTTC roll out. For all those broadband wonks out there these developments represent a significant step towards what I have heard termed, and I kid you not, next generation nirvana. (more…)

As Dan Smyth very presciently points out , Stephen Carter got a lot of undeserved criticism in the media when Digital Britain when it came out. Sure, it could have gone further in a number of areas. No-one likes a new tax. There could have been more mention of the role for satellite networks in delivering some of the commitments in it. This is especially the case for Intellect, given our position as the only major European trade body that representing all major European satellite network operators. But I like my DAB radio, and I think I could handle £6 a year as my contribution towards NGA deployment and giving everyone a legal right to broadband.

Regardless of what could have been said in Digital Britain, the key point is: Almost alone in Europe (with the exception of France) the UK now knows what direction its communications infrastructure, and associated industries, is going in in a very comprehensive way. We do have a set of policies to build on. The legislative tools to implement them are about to start making their way through parliament. I know for a fact that many other EU member states see Digital Britain as being far ahead of their own plans and are looking enviously at us. The Tories could do with noting this, rather than simply scoring political points over what could or might have been said in it. Maybe I will be forced to eat my words when the Tory Review of the Creative Industries comes out, but as I haven’t seen a draft yet I’d just urge them to be a bit more constructive.

This is why, more than most ministers in the current Government, I will be particularly sad when Carter steps down. His speech at our Consumer Electronics Conference was particular short, snappy and free of meaningless jargon. My view of it was helped by him name-checking Intellect heavily of course, but regardless of that it was definitely one of the highlights of the day. When asked, by the chair Maggie Philbin, what he thought his most important piece of technology would be in 20 years, his answer, “a pacemaker”, was pretty sharp. He also publicly confirmed that Intellect will be working with Government to ensure the recommendations outlined in Digital Britain are implemented. However much praise Intellect got yesterday, there is no denying that Carter simply gets ‘it’, whatever ‘it’ is. Some stand-outs included his statement that “the key role for Government in its relations with business is clarity” and his firm implication that the best policy comes from ministers who aren’t political careerists and therefore don’t care what enemies they make. I couldn’t agree more. We do of course need as many democratically elected ministers as we can get. But we also know how difficult it is for Labour to find them at the moment. There is no denying that peers can sometimes be really effective at policy making and implementation because they aren’t always climbing the greasy pole.

I also know a number of the civil servants who’ve worked under Carter as a minister fairly well. Gushing is not too strong a word. In the words of one I was talking too - “When we wrote Digital Britain, Carter actually had us all effectively co-ordinated and working towards a common goal, we felt like we were achieving something”. Anyone who talks to civil servants regularly knows that, in their language, this is tantamount to them voting him as the greatest Briton of all time. Not that I would. But you get the message. Carter was that rare beast- a politician who really does know what he is talking about. Somehow we need to get hold of more of them.

So I guess the question now is, will we get a replacement? And who will it be? In fact, will Labour be able to find someone to pilot the related Digital Economy Bill through parliament? We can but wonder. But whether Carter gets his mooted role as Chief Executive at ITV or not, he has done a lot to move the debate on how Government supports ICT development forward. For that, he should be applauded.

Ed Miliband, Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change announced last Friday the UK’s ‘Road to Copenhagen.’ With a strategy that is ambitious, effective, and fair the Government believes that we can make great headway coming into the Climate Change Sumit and achieve a robust (i.e. staying below a 2°C rise in global temp) climate agreement that all (relevant) countries agree to. Well, no counter arguing from me on that point.
(more…)

I must confess I had low expectations about the recently published Digital Britain report. The news media prior to publication had invented a number of stories about how little would be delivered in the report many of which turned out to be wide of the mark. Judging by the press stories today after publication many had not read the report properly (although to be fair it is 245 pages) and the stories were on the whole negative. However there are some rays of sunshine in the report not least in the area of broadband and the universal service commitment. This is an area where on first generation broadband the UK was in the forefront but with Korea , Japan and others announcing new initiatives the UK was in danger of being left behind. The problem is that with the credit crunch and the need to bail/bale (sic) out the banks the Government is essentially rather short of cash. Although to fund the rollout of superfast broadband is fairly modest (£15-30Bn) in the scheme of things it would be politically difficult for the government to underwrite this amount. So, by the approach being taken of funding the USC by using funding left over from DSO and a mixture of other funding, it allows the industry to deliver by around 2012 a near 100% broadband coverage at 2MBit/s. In addition the industry is stepping up to delivering faster broadband by announcing plans to cover between 40-60% of the population with the levy on every telephone line delivering the rest. Ah I hear you say it is too little too late and why should we pay for the upgrades. We live in a culture where we expect everything free and if we can’t have it we don’t understand why. The UK BB market is one of the most competitive in the world and there is no margin for investment in new technology. What the levy does is to allow the operators to invest in covering the last third of the country which wouldn’t otherwise be covered, so as to give the benefits of better broadband for all. So far all I’ve seen in the press and on the blogs is that the levy is wrong but I’ve not seen anywhere an alternative solution that is better. Come on find me a better way of doing it!

The power went out at Intellect HQ last week. No servers, no email, no phones and no coffee machine. The office ground to halt. Although it was nice to see people’s faces rising from their screens and hear the level of natter rise, it was a reminder of the hazards of national reliance on information infrastructure.

The UK is a net-enabled society. Our businesses are technology junkies, becoming ever more reliant on networked infrastructure as the years progress. And rightly so – with the use of technology we are have been able to develop our economy, improve our national health system, our security services and our police systems.

It was only yesterday I was reminded about the perils of national digitalisation whilst sat in an Intellect cyber threats group meeting. When you talk to people working in the security and resilience field, it really does drive home the importance of backing up our national move towards a digital economy with the correct processes and contingency plans to hold the system up when things go wrong.

And things really do go wrong. Hackers can bring down government websites and disrupt access to public services and power outages from manmade or natural disaster can bring businesses to their knees.

In January this year BERR and DCLG released their interim Digital Britain report. Intellect supports the move towards digitalisation and the benefits it can bring to citizens. But this move must not be made blindly – Government must consider that a move towards a digital nation means that appropriate security and resilience measures need to be put into place to ensure that new infrastructure is robust. Loss or denial of that infrastructure, whether intentional or accidental has a number of nasty consequences that can be mitigated with thorough scenario planning and appropriate security and resilience considerations. To be fully effective, security must be considered as an intrinsic part of the process, not simply an afterthought when things go wrong.

p.s title is reference to a Satnogold song about power outages - for a musical accompanyment to your blog reading please feel free to listen here