Conclusions and recommendations
1. The
case for switching off the analogue signal grows stronger as more
and more convert to digital. No-one would dispute that it would
be wasteful to go on indefinitely using large amounts of valuable
spectrum for analogue television when the number of viewers is
steadily shrinking. However, the case for forcing the pace by
starting the switch-off process when a sizeable number are still
choosing to stay with analogue is more controversial and potentially
risky. The Government should therefore be commended for a bold
decision to proceed with complete analogue switch-off by 2012.
All attention must now focus on ensuring that switchover takes
place with the minimum cost and disruption. We must also ensure
that the opportunities that it will present for a whole new range
of digital services are exploited to the full. (Paragraph 22)
2. The Government
and Digital UK should do far more to explain to the public why
they have chosen to proceed with analogue switch-off now, what
options are available to people and on whom the costs and benefits
will fall. This is all the more important in view of the element
of compulsion that has been introduced. (Paragraph 35)
3. We share the concern
that by emphasising the low cost of set-top boxes in an effort
to persuade people that switch-off will be relatively inexpensive,
the Government risks missing an opportunity to encourage the take-up
of more sophisticated digital technology offering interactive
services and additional facilities. The Government and Digital
UK should make clear that the more advanced boxes and other digital
platforms, including broadband, may offer significant additional
benefits rather than simply focusing on the cheapest option. (Paragraph
43)
4. We support the
proposed development by the BBC and ITV of a free-to-view satellite
platform, which should carry all the public service channels,
since it will extend choice and offer more services than is possible
through digital terrestrial transmission. (Paragraph 48)
5. We welcome the
development of local television and the potential it offers to
provide a valuable community service. We would hope that the opportunity
offered by analogue switch-off will be seized to allow the establishment
of local television services. (Paragraph 54)
6. There are a wide
range of different possible uses for released spectrum which also
involve different engineering requirements. We recommend that
in coming to a decision on the deployment of released spectrum,
Ofcom takes full account of both social and economic benefits.
We are concerned at suggestions that delay in reaching decisions
may affect the economics of some potential applications and would
therefore hope that this process can be carried out as expeditiously
as possible to give certainty to all the industries affected and
to give time to the transmission companies to carry out the necessary
work as part of the switch-off programme. (Paragraph 58)
7. We note the assurances
from the Government and the transmission companies that there
is an economic case for converting every single transmitter site.
However, in the absence of more detailed published analysis, this
will remain open to dispute. We recommend that the Government
provides more information on the cost of converting television
transmitters to digital as a function of population coverage.
Where this involves the use of commercially confidential data,
the analysis should be subjected to independent audit. (Paragraph
66)
8. The BBC's next
licence fee settlement should take into account the Corporation's
share of building the DTT network since this is by definition
a broadcasting cost. However, we do not believe that this in itself
justifies an above-inflation settlement. Whatever the outcome
of the latest negotiations between the Government and the BBC
on the next licence fee settlement, it is vital that the relevant
figures are subjected to independent audit and the detailed conclusions
of such an audit published. (Paragraph 69)
9. It remains our
view that the benefit side of the cost-benefit analysis is very
subjective, and that the narrow economic case for switchover is
inconclusive. (Paragraph 77)
10. The economic evidence
in favour of digital terrestrial switchover is limited, but we
recognise that the cost-benefit analysis has been used to inform
rather than guide the decision that has been taken to proceed.
(Paragraph 79)
11. The scope of the
Government's targeted assistance programme is too restricted and
fails to acknowledge those who, by dint of income or social exclusion,
are in genuine need. With analogue switch-off beginning in only
two years, this matter requires urgent consideration. (Paragraph
82)
12. Responsibility
for the administration of the targeted assistance scheme for vulnerable
groups must be clearly assigned. The scheme should take into account
the need to provide adequate funding for the voluntary sector,
which will play a vital role in providing practical assistance
to vulnerable groups. (Paragraph 85)
13. We recommend that
the targeted assistance scheme should include the provision of
advice about the capabilities of competing digital TV platforms
and the varying opportunities and facilities they offer to vulnerable
groups. (Paragraph 86)
14. We recommend that
further trials are conducted with the aim of identifying groups
who are potentially left vulnerable by analogue switch-off. The
trials should include people with disabilities, low income groups,
the socially excluded, and involve the voluntary sector. (Paragraph
88)
15. The extent to
which the emerging package of targeted assistance can be deemed
to be platform-neutral and thus compatible with European competition
law will have to be monitored and checked with care. (Paragraph
89)
16. While transmitter
upgrading is clearly a broadcasting cost the provision of television
and other receiving equipment is a social cost in recognition
of the need to provide compensation to vulnerable groups. We believe
that the use of Exchequer funds to meet this cost is more progressive
and justified given the value of the spectrum released. It also
places accountability properly on a Minister's desk. We recommend
that the Government should reconsider this option. (Paragraph
95)
17. The Government
should do more to ensure the timely availability of digital receiving
equipment and remote controls which are affordable and easy to
use by people with cognitive, visual, hearing or physical impairments.
(Paragraph 97)
18. The Government
and Ofcom should take steps to ensure that access to a wide range
of subtitled and audio described programmes is available on all
digital television platforms. (Paragraph 98)
19. We are concerned
that the complexity of the digital switchover management structure
leaves lines of accountability blurred. There need to be clearer
chains of command with precise responsibilities specifically defined.
We also believe that there is a danger that Digital UK will lack
the authority and resources to manage the interests of a diverse
group of industry stakeholders should their bonds of mutual self-interest
come under strain. (Paragraph 104)
20. Both convergence
in communications technologies and the need for clear political
supervision and accountability indicate that the digital switchover
programme needs a visible champion and that this should be an
identified Government Minister. We recommend that this "lead"
Minister should be within the Department for Culture, Media and
Sport as the lead Department in this process. (Paragraph 109)
21. We recommend that
Ofcom and Digital UK initiate DTT reception trials in a variety
of geographical regions and settings. (Paragraph 118)
22. For new transmitter
masts, we recommend that local planning authorities be formally
reminded of the Government's policy on digital switchover in terrestrial
broadcasting and that this should inform the necessary planning
applications. (Paragraph 121)
23. We recommend that
the Government issues guidance to local planning authorities to
ensure that proposals to modify existing transmitter masts are
dealt with expeditiously and in the context of national policy.
(Paragraph 122)
24. Digital UK must
monitor closely the operation and consequences of the transition
period between the loss of BBC Two and complete analogue switch-off
in any given region. A longer period should be adopted if there
are indications that this is necessary to protect consumer interests.
(Paragraph 126)
25. We recommend that
the Government and Digital UK conduct a comprehensive economic
and technical digital switchover trial aimed specifically at multiple
dwelling units. The scope of such a trial should be such as to
include local authorities, registered social landlords and private
landlords. (Paragraph 134)
26. We recommend that
the Government re-examines planning regulations and procedures
to ensure greater equity in their application to satellite dishes
and aerials. At the very least, local planning authorities should
be encouraged, through formal guidance, to exercise the discretion
they have in the application of planning regulations to satellite
dishes. (Paragraph 137)
27. Digital UK should
provide the public with clear information on the prices and capabilities
of digital receiving equipment across all platforms. (Paragraph
140)
28. Set-top boxes
and other digital receiving equipment should be labelled with
information on their energy efficiency. (Paragraph 142)
29. The BBC's services
are, quite rightly, available on all digital platforms. The Corporation
must be platform-neutral in all its digital promotion and information
campaigns. (Paragraph 146)
30. Digital UK should
provide consumers with information on the prices of equipment
and services associated with digital switchover. The latter should
include the cost of aerial installations under different circumstances.
(Paragraph 151)
31. Digital UK should
monitor closely aerial installation practices to ensure that consumers
are properly protected. The importance of using accredited installers
should be reinforced through widespread advertising and information
campaigns. This must be matched by tough action by Trading Standards
and other enforcement bodies against "cowboys" attempting
to exploit lack of understanding about the technical requirements
of the switchover process. (Paragraph 152)
32. In view of the
Government's assessment of the economic benefits of digital switchover,
we believe it is appropriate that households that consequentially
lose all access to television with their existing receiving equipment,
including those that fall outside the targeted assistance scheme,
should be given assistance to migrate to alternative platforms.
(Paragraph 157)
33. Overall, the case
for switching off analogue television to extend coverage of the
digital terrestrial platform offers clear benefits, but also carries
significant risks. By addressing the potential pitfalls identified,
the Government can mitigate any adverse consequences and maximise
the advantages that digital television undoubtedly offers. (Paragraph
159)
34. The Government's
adoption of a firm and early timetable for analogue switch-off
is a bold, and some would say brave, decision. The timetable appears
to be technically realistic, but if it is to be achieved with
minimum disruption and maximum support the process will require
timely regulation by Ofcom, effective management by Digital UK
and clear leadership by Government.(Paragraph 160)
| 
