| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
4 Mar 2003 : Column 686—continued
Michael Fabricant (Lichfield): Northern Ireland is largely rural—rather like Scotland, as the hon. Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Mr. Allan) pointed out. How will the provision affect rural areas of Northern Ireland? What consideration has the Minister given to the wireless and satellite provision of broadband? He will be aware of the excellent document produced by the Communication Workers Union, which shows that Britain is 20th in the world for the provision of broadband.
I want to pursue the line of questioning taken by the hon. Member for Sheffield, Hallam. Will there be a distortion in the market? Assuming that the problems of the provision of broadband in rural areas can be overcome, will we find that Northern Ireland becomes a Mecca for the application of broadband while the rest of the United Kingdom is far from being so? The Minister will be aware, from the many hours that we spent on this subject in Committee, that many of us are concerned not only that broadband is not yet available in rural areas in
England but also that it is not available in suburban areas and even some urban areas. How will he ensure that there is no imbalance between various parts of the UK?
Mr. Chris Mole (Ipswich): Will the Minister comment on the fact that although we have the second highest growth rate in Europe for broadband, some locations are still struggling to make their case for broadband to service providers? Does he welcome initiatives such as that announced last week by the regional development agency for my area, the East of England Development Agency, of investment of about £5.8 million of its funds and Government funds to identify for network providers locations where broadband could be promoted? Of the two initiatives announced last week, one was in rural Diss, in Norfolk, and the other in urban Ipswich; both are good examples of the joint initiatives undertaken by the DTI and RDAs.
Mr. Timms: We have had a brief but interesting discussion on the roll-out of broadband and we shall come back to that subject in a later amendment.
I accept the important points made by the hon. Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Mr. Allan) about the need for care in the use of public spending on telecommunications infrastructure. I am aware of the case in Scotland to which he referred. There are clear rules about state aid problems and it is essential to respect and comply with them. None of the proposals is in conflict with that.
I agree with the hon. Gentleman that there is a role for public participation in some circumstances. As I said earlier, local authorities can already contribute to the costs of telecommunications infrastructure. The new clause simply allows DETI to do so as well.
It is becoming increasingly clear that such interventions are most helpfully made regionally. My hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich (Mr. Mole) rightly drew attention to the work of the East of England Development Agency. Last week, I visited Birmingham and held similar discussions with Advantage West Midlands. A growing number of interesting initiatives are being taken by the RDAs, using, in part, the £30 million broadband fund provided for them by my Department. Such initiatives help to extend the availability of broadband services to businesses and residential users.
The hon. Member for Lichfield (Michael Fabricant) asked about wireless provision. Several of the EEDA initiatives involve wireless. In rural areas, there will be an increasing use of wireless to extend broadband rapidly to places where it has not yet been possible to upgrade the existing telecommunications infrastructure.
The hon. Gentleman also mentioned satellite provision. SEEDA—the South East England Development Agency—has done some interesting work in subsidising small businesses, so that they can use satellite-based broadband services.
1 pm
I agree with the hon. Member for Lichfield in his statement of admiration for the Broadband Britain campaign, run by the Communication Workers Union.
I was present at the launch of that campaign, and I very much welcome the contribution that it is making. Of course things are changing very rapidly. We reached only 1 million broadband connections last October; we are now past 1.5 million, and the number is increasing by in excess of 30,000 new connections a week. So we are certainly no longer in the position that we appeared to be in when the CWU document was published. As my hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich suggested, we have now got the second biggest broadband network in Europe—after only the German network—so a great deal of progress has been made.
Michael Fabricant: Will the Minister take this opportunity to praise BT for reducing the threshold at which it will enable its exchanges when people have registered an interest in it? In many areas, but not all, the threshold has dropped from 650 to 350 people. However, will he use his particular powers of persuasion to ensure that the threshold is reduced to 350 people in all areas, not just some?
Mr. Timms: I very much welcome BT's announcement to reduce those thresholds. Of course, the level at which they are set is a commercial decision for BT. It should be recognised that the cable companies play an important part in extending access to broadband—they still have more than half the market, I believe—and there are about 200 resellers of BT services, so the industry is making a big effort, and I welcome the progress that has been made.
The House generally welcomes the change for Northern Ireland in the new clause, but it is important to underline my agreement with the points made by the hon. Member for Sheffield, Hallam about ensuring that such a route does not permit inappropriate state aid, and I assure the House that that will not occur.
Clause read a Second time, and added to the Bill.
New Clause 25
Power of Ofcom to Retain Costs of carrying out Spectrum Functions
'(1) OFCOM have power to make a statement of the principles under which they may retain any or all of the amounts paid to them in pursuance of obligations imposed by or under the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1998 (c. 6).
(2) Where such a statement of principles authorises the retention of an amount, OFCOM are not required to pay it into the appropriate Consolidated Fund in accordance with section 390.
(3) Principles contained in a statement made by OFCOM under this section must be such as appear to them to be likely to secure, on the basis of such estimates of the likely costs as it is practicable to make—
(a) that, on a year by year basis, the aggregate amount of the amounts retained by OFCOM does not exceed the amount required by OFCOM for meeting the annual cost to OFCOM of carrying out the functions mentioned in subsection (4);
(b) that the amounts retained by OFCOM are objectively justifiable and proportionate to the costs in respect of which they are retained; and
(c) that the relationship between meeting the cost of carrying out those functions and the amounts retained is transparent.
(4) Those functions are—
(a) OFCOM's functions under the enactments relating to the management of the radio spectrum except those specified in subsection (5); and
(b) the function of taking any steps that OFCOM consider it necessary to take—
(i) in preparation for the carrying out of any of the functions mentioned in paragraph (a) of this subsection; or
(ii) for the purpose of facilitating the carrying out of those functions or otherwise in connection with carrying them out.
(5) The excepted functions of OFCOM are—
(a) their functions under section 19(2);
(b) their functions under subsections (1) and (2) of section 147 so far as carried out in relation to the use of the electromagnetic spectrum at places outside the United Kingdom, and their functions under subsection (5) of that section;
(c) their functions under section 150;
(d) their functions under section 153;
(e) their functions under section 163;
(f) their functions under sections 170 to 172;
(g) any functions conferred on them under section 5 of the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1949 (c. 54); and
(h) any function not falling within the preceding paragraphs in so far as the costs of carrying it out are met from payments made to OFCOM by virtue of section 25 or 147(8) of this Act.
(6) A statement under this section may include provision which, for the purposes of the principles contained in the statement and of the preparation of accounts in accordance with section 390(4), requires an amount actually received in one year—
(a) to be treated as referable to costs incurred in that year and in one or more subsequent years; and
(b) to be brought into account, in each of those years, in accordance with an apportionment for which provision is made in the statement.
(7) A deficit or surplus shown (after applying this subsection for all previous years) by an account prepared under section 390(4) is to be carried forward and taken into account in determining what is required by OFCOM in relation to the following year for meeting the costs of carrying out the functions mentioned in subsection (4) of this section.
(8) A statement of principles under this section—
(a) if it is expressed to apply for a limited period, does not apply to any amounts paid to OFCOM after the end of that period; and
(b) in any event, does not apply to amounts paid to them after a withdrawal of the statement takes effect.
(9) OFCOM may revise a statement made under this section.
(10) The consent of the Treasury is required for the making, revision or withdrawal of a statement under this section.
(11) Where OFCOM make or revise a statement of this section they must publish so much of the statement or revised statement as appears to them necessary for demonstrating that the statement or revision complies with subsection (3).'.—[Mr. Timms.]
Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |