Examination of Witnesses (Questions 40-42)
MONDAY 31 MARCH 2003
DR PETER
RADLEY AND
MS VALERIE
CARTER
40. You mentioned a couple of areas where you
felt government could do more and one was around sorting out the
state aid issues and the other one was around piggy-backing on
public provision greater private provision. Is there anything
else you think would make a fundamental difference if government
were to do it? Is it a matter of much more in the way of cash
being needed or is that a relatively minor aspect of all this?
(Dr Radley) Cash is never a minor issue. Investment
means money and money has to go in. As far as I can see, there
is money available in the private sector, provided a case can
be made. This is where government has to recognise it can play
a bigger role. That is why I keep on stressing the role of government
on the demand side, about saying yes, we are going to support
initiatives, maybe through the RDAs, we are going to make sure
that local communities can do their thing in the way that they
know how. That is a very powerful thing and I know that communities
which do generate a case can go to a commercial organisation which
can in fact find the money to serve that need. It is not just
about cash, although that is always very important. I do stress
the point that I should like to see government playing a bigger
role as buyer and user of broadband, not just in its back office
functions, but in delivery to the citizen and I should also like
to see government as the largest single employer in the country
taking advantage and using broadband for tele-working. In each
rural community there will be lots of people who would love to
have a job inside their community and broadband can enable them
to have that job in their community with the same provision to
their desk within their community—that does not necessarily
mean at home, but in a tele-working centre in their community—just
the same facilities, as they would have if they travelled an hour
and a half down the road to work in some centre.
Mr Drew
41. Do you think we have concentrated on access
to broadband at the cost of take-up? I am aware that when I talk
to BT, we have all these wonderful campaigns, all the community
interest and they are proving successful and I congratulate BT
in responding to that, yet when you look at the actual take-up
by individuals and business it is pretty poor. Everyone wants
it, so they get it, but is this like Sky, which people will eventually
move over to because they want to watch their sport on television,
or is this something else that people want access to, but they
do not really want to spend the money?
(Dr Radley) That is not my experience. All the evidence
I have seen says that people who have broadband say they do not
know how they lived without it. It is one of those things. Raising
awareness, creating demand, having people in a community who can
talk enthusiastically and know what they are talking about and
we can support them, is important to generate that demand side.
In some senses, certainly two years ago when the broadband stakeholder
group started, the only issue was beating up BT on the supply
side, the infrastructure and technology side. The argument has
balanced up a lot more and there is still more we can do, particularly
in rural communities, on stimulating that demand side.
Mr Curry
42. Thank you for getting through the entire
hearing without mentioning anything being rolled out.
(Dr Radley) It sounds like a cigarette,
does it not?
Chairman: I do not think we will get through
the whole inquiry without something being rolled out. Ms Carter
and Dr Radley, thank you very much for giving of your time this
afternoon.
|
