Peter Viney's Blog

Labour promises free Broadband for all …

I still remember comedian Jasper Carrott many years ago: “I bought a new LP yesterday. It had a big sticker with FREE MANDELA on the outside. Well, I broke the shrink wrap and there wasn’t one in mine.”

Free broadband in every packet … this is (unfortunately) a crude electoral bribe, which is un-costed.

It is true that accessing many government and utility services require internet access, which you can get on any phone line, however slow. I also think it appalling that it’s mandatory to have internet to access stuff. From next year, any small business (e.g. free-lance writers like myself) will have to scan or photograph every receipt and invoice, and upload them to the Inland Revenue. That’s going to be the law, though there is no law saying “you must have internet access and a Smart Phone.”

You should be able to get access in libraries and public buildings, but they’re open only for restricted and ever shorter hours.

Yes, for accessing government services you do need (or very soon will need) internet for almost everything. This is virtually true for utility companies. Banks are trying to force it through. Take my father-in-law. He’s 97. He used computers much of his working life as an aeronautical engineer. He expressed no desire to use them in retirement. Every time he pays gas or water bills it costs him £10 to pay by cheque. Not that they express it like that, but he loses the “£10 discount for Direct debit or paying online.” This actually means “We want £10 to cash a cheque.” Banks promised to eliminate cheques by 2015. It didn’t happen, but it will soon.

I have worked at home on computer for decades. I currently get between 9 Mbps and 13 Mbps. It’s called “broadband.” Is that what the Labour party mean? It’s a long way off the 50 Mbps fibre optic promised. That gets as far as a box at the end of the road, then it’s old copper wire. It’s enough to watch YouTube. Uploading video to the main TV on Netflix works. It is absolutely no problem for scanning and sending photos or MP3s.

High speed fibre optic comes into play for streaming high-definition videos, playing games. Everyone needs internet, but they do not need high speed fibre optic broadband simply to access government services, order repeat prescriptions, pay utility bills, do online banking. A basic non-broadband internet package can start at £2.50 a week. Less than a Starbucks coffee.

Then there’s BT. Everyone who deals with BT internet complains. I use Zen Internet, and I can get friendly helpful Tech support quickly, and they devote as much time as needed. Quite often, the issue is the BT line (which all of them except Virgin Media use) and they can’t get answers or sense from BT. Will a nationalized BT be better? At present, one of the best ways of solving issues is switching supplier. What will happen with a BT monopoly?

Then there’s Virgin Media. Labour never mentioned them, but they own and run their own cable infrastructure. Would Labour buy it? Confiscate it? Drive it out of business? How will they compensate Virgin?

Then there’s the trees. Virgin don’t come past our house because of the trees. When the original cables were run (pre-Virgin) I attended local planning meetings. They detailed the massive tree destruction caused by cabling in Kensington and Chelsea with photos. I live in a Conservation Area, and in the interests of tree protection, cabling was banned in our area. At that time, part of the government deal was that they had to cable any house for £100. Where I live there are long narrow drives through trees. The cable company was delighted not to be forced to cable us at £100 a pop. I asked for a quote from BT on running fibre optic right up to the house rather than the road when they eventually get to the point outside our front gate.. £3000. (The original cables meant digging a small trench. It probably doesn’t need that now).

So … take that to a farm or cottage in the country, a mile from the next building. I would guess a minimum of £100,000. Then take that to a Scottish island.

BUT if it’s free in urban areas, why should it not be free in remote hamlets? (Well, ignore the argument that many people choose to live in remote areas precisely because they don’t want to be surrounded by broadband). If you live remotely, a satellite dish and Sky broadband is the current answer. Will they have to compensate Sky for killing that part of their business?  Will you have a right to demand a fibre optic land line wherever you live?

Then there’s costing. Labour say £20 billion. BT say a minimum of £36 billion. An independent analyst says a true costing with buying part of BT and Virgin is £100 billion. Do we want to spend that so people can stream Netflix in hi-def? Without Netflix and Sky, there are still dozens of TV stations (57 channels and Nothing On, as Bruce Springsteen sang). Having a “right to high-speed video streaming” is in the luxury goods area. We all have a right to food and drink, but not to champagne and caviar.

No one mentioned in costing the loss of 20% VAT the government picks up on the nation’s broadband and internet.

Hold on! Free broadband won’t be any good unless you have a computer, tablet or Smart Phone. So do we then all get free computers? (I’ll have a 27″ Mac Retina 5K, please.) Who pays to install a phone line if you don’t have one? Who supplies the router for your broadband? Maybe you need an extender. Will that come fee too?

Compare what £100 billion would do in the Health Service. In elderly care. In greening the country … or instead,  giving everyone free Netflix UHD quality. I know my choice.

I’m afraid it is pie in the sky. It is a patent bribe, which demeans everyone involved in offering it. It insults the intelligence of the British public.