Mr John Whittingdale (Maldon & East Chelmsford, Conservative)

I beg to move amendment No. 129, in

clause 61, page 61, line 37, at end insert ', including broadband services'.

Mr Roger Gale (North Thanet, Conservative)

With this it will be convenient to take amendment No. 237, in

clause 61, page 61, line 44, at end insert—

'(e) affordable access to services on ever-greater bandwidth.'.

In view of the time, the importance that some hon. Members attach to the clause, and the fact that it has been referred to this morning, I am perfectly prepared

to allow what would in effect be a clause stand part debate on the amendments.

Mr John Whittingdale (Maldon & East Chelmsford, Conservative)

I am grateful to you for that, Mr. Gale.

I acknowledge that the amendment is flawed and deficient, but it is terribly important that we have the opportunity to talk about broadband. It is of enormous importance, and it is extraordinary that the Government's publication, ''The draft Communications Bill—The Policy'', relegates the Government's policy on broadband to an annexe, which states:

''This comprehensive strategy does not require any legislation in order to achieve its objectives. As a result we are not looking to the Bill to help deliver our strategy.''

Given that the Bill will set the framework for communications for probably the next decade, it should take account of the fact that making broadband available is the biggest challenge that we face as a nation in terms of modernising our economy and rolling out the technology.

One reason why I accept that the amendment is deficient is that it is almost impossible to define broadband. In this country, it is regarded as the service that is now on offer from cable providers and BT at the rate of some 128 kilobits per second, or perhaps 512. Some cable companies intend to go further and supply the service at 1 megabit per second. I dial up my internet service provider daily to download my e-mails and access the internet, and I find the current speed on narrowband access incredibly frustrating—even 128 kilobits per second would be a big improvement. It will, no doubt, become faster, so it would probably be unhelpful even to try to define broadband formally at this stage. However, it is probably fair to say that even if we do not attempt to provide a formal definition, most of us know what it is when we see it.

Why is broadband important? It allows people to access a greater range of services: currently, people talk about downloading films or playing computer games, but it goes much further. Broadband is of huge economic importance to the nation. One recent study suggested that success in the new technologies, which means broadband in particular, could increase the United Kingdom's non-inflationary rate of growth from 2.5 per cent. to 3.5 per cent. in the next three years. A recent report entitled ''The Payoff Of Ubiquitous Broadband Deployment'' shows a positive correlation between broadband penetration and GDP per capita, which is already clear in the United States. There will be a real economic benefit to our nation if we can achieve much wider broadband access than we have at present.

The problem is that broadband can be made available through a variety of means. Most people who currently have access to broadband have it because they are cable subscribers, either to NTL or to Telewest, or because they have obtained it through BT, via ADSL technology. However, ADSL technology has flaws—for a start, it can be supplied

only to homes that are within 5.5 km of an enabled exchange. That means that even if BT eventually enables all its exchanges, there will be areas of the country where people cannot access broadband through that means.

It is therefore important that we consider all the other potential mechanisms for making broadband available. The Radiocommunications Agency is currently auctioning 12 licences to provide broadband fixed wireless access—we may discuss that later in our proceedings. There is also the potential development of satellite—I am talking about a one-way download from satellite first, but in due course a two-way download may be possible, although that is likely, at least in the short term, to be too expensive for residential customers. 3G, too, offers possibilities through the ability to access broadband through mobile telephony once 3G finally gets going.

Further ahead in the future, all sorts of other technologies will appear, some of which it is impossible even to guess at now. Perhaps one day, there will be the prospect of optical fibre linking exchanges first, then extending to the kerb, and finally into the home. That would make broadband available at a speed that is now almost inconceivable.

Mr Andrew Lansley (South Cambridgeshire, Conservative)

In my hon. Friend's tour of such mechanisms, he has not referred to the possibility of wireless broadband using 3.5 gigahertz, which is in use in a number of countries. It has not been made available here simply by reason of allocation of frequency. Perhaps we shall come to that during the radio spectrum discussions.

Mr John Whittingdale (Maldon & East Chelmsford, Conservative)

That is a good point that we should certainly consider during our discussion on the allocation of spectrum. We look forward to that debate on our return after Christmas.

Mr John Greenway (Ryedale, Conservative)

Another issue to which my hon. Friend has yet to refer is cost. Although the technology clearly exists and many people have access to it, does he think that cost presents difficulties? This very morning, I received a circular from BT saying that I could have broadband in my home in Kennington for £27 per month.

Mr Stephen Timms (Minister of State (e-Commerce & Competitiveness), Department of Trade and Industry; East Ham, Labour)

Excellent.

Mr John Greenway (Ryedale, Conservative)

That might well be an extremely good deal if I spent enough time at my home in Kennington to make use of it, but does my hon. Friend the Member for Maldon and East Chelmsford think that many people to whom such services might be of value would regard that cost as excessive?

Mr John Whittingdale (Maldon & East Chelmsford, Conservative)

It is a huge improvement on what BT used to charge. The price has come down, but I agree that it is still a significant sum. I suspect that at present many people feel that they are not likely to use the service enough. It is possible to get it slightly cheaper. To some extent, the market is now providing cheaper services, but I do not think that there is anything below about £20 a month, which is still a significant sum for many.

It is worth comparing how we are getting on with what is happening in other countries. In some respects

we are making good progress. In terms of availability, we are middle ranking in the international league tables; about 65 per cent. of the population has cable or ADSL technology available to them should they choose to take it up. That means that we are ahead of France but behind Germany. There is room for improvement, but it is not an absolute disgrace. In our use of the internet, too, we are relatively well placed.

The real concern, however, is in the matter of take-up. At the end of the day, our competitiveness will depend on how many people have that technology and use it. A table of the top 20 countries would show that South Korea was far ahead, but we are lagging behind Canada, the United States, Sweden, Austria, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Germany, Portugal, Italy and Spain—and by quite a long way. Most people would acknowledge that, in terms of take-up, we are now at the bottom of the international league table.

Mr Simon Thomas (Ceredigion, Plaid Cymru)

Does the hon. Gentleman accept that there is not only an international digital divide but that there is one within the United Kingdom? Great swathes of the country, including many rural areas, not only do not take up broadband but do not have access to it.

Mr John Whittingdale (Maldon & East Chelmsford, Conservative)

I agree absolutely, and I want to deal with that matter. It is arguable, in the furthest-flung parts of the kingdom, that it would cost an awful lot of money to make broadband available to a small number of people. However, that is the case not only in extremely rural parts of the country, but in parts of the country that are pretty close to London and which have relatively large populations. That includes my constituency and, I suspect, the constituencies of other Committee members.

The Government have rightly set a target, saying that they wish to make the UK the most extensive and competitive broadband market in G7 by 2005. We have three years to go and we are bottom among the G7 countries. The question is how the Government intend to achieve that. Various suggestions have been made. I was surprised earlier this morning to find myself defending the importance of notification of the European Union. I now find myself praising the efforts of the Communication Workers Union, which has made some very good suggestions that the Government should consider. I draw attention to three specific suggestions. First, it said that Ofcom, as the ultimate regulator, needs to ensure that its actions promote the provision and take up of broadband. Ofcom should have a role in promoting the take up of broadband in the national interest.

Secondly, there is no question but that one of the ways to achieve roll out of broadband is through using the power of Government as purchaser. The Government are purchasing broadband in schools, hospitals and in all sorts of other ways. They could use their purchasing power to roll out broadband, because if BT could be assured of relatively secure demand that broadband would be used, it would be more willing than perhaps it is now to enable exchanges.

Thirdly, the CWU suggested that Ofcom should promote demonstration projects and publicise the benefits of broadband. All three suggestions are relatively limited, but it is terribly important.

Mr Michael Fabricant (Lichfield, Conservative)

I have a letter dated 10 December from Christopher Bland concerning a large part of my constituency with no access to broadband. It is not quite as the hon. Member for Ceredigion (Mr. Thomas) implied; it is not that rural areas only are affected. In his letter, Mr. Bland, the chairman of BT, said that to help decide that an exchange should be upgraded, BT will

''establish trigger levels ranging from 200 to 750 end user registrations.''

Does not that relate in particular to the point of my hon. Friend the Member for Maldon and East Chelmsford that if people do not understand the benefits of broadband they will not go onto the web or make contact with British Telecom through other means in order to be one of those people who is a trigger that leads to broadband being introduced into an area?

Mr John Whittingdale (Maldon & East Chelmsford, Conservative)

It is imaginative of British Telecom to have set these levels. I hope that that will mean that those who want to be exchange enabled will go out and campaign for people to take up broadband. However, my hon. Friend's point that this idea has some drawbacks is valid.

This is a very important issue for the competitiveness of the United Kingdom. As the hon. Member for Ceredigion suggested, there is a real danger that a two-tier economy will develop in this country. If one of our objectives is—for instance—to increase home working, which will get people off the roads, it will be much more difficult to achieve that increase if they cannot access broadband. Businesses not only in Wales but in constituencies such as mine will be put at a disadvantage if they cannot get broadband.

I could read out hundreds of constituency letters that refer to this point, but I will read from only one of them. It is from Andrew Palmer, who is a constituent of mine. He wrote to British Telecom:

''In the last few weeks there has been an explosion of advertising by BT in the newspapers and on television advertising the delights of Broadband. The public now fully expects to enjoy a series of new experiences which will make the rest of their lives pale into insignificance.

I am afraid that each advertisement merely further maddens me; because of the fact that is not stated in your advertisements, that BT has no intention of making these services available outside urban areas for 10 to 20 years''.

Mr Brian White (North East Milton Keynes, Labour)

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of what is happening in Cornwall? There are a number of pilot exercises in that county that demonstrate that broadband is available in rural areas. Those exercises could be replicated throughout the country.

Mr John Whittingdale (Maldon & East Chelmsford, Conservative)

Cornwall has been particularly fortunate, but we are not talking about the extremities of the kingdom or deprived areas that have received special help. In this case, we are talking about a village in Essex that is about 50 miles from London. It is the fact that British Telecom is now promoting broadband

that is rubbing salt into the wounds of those people who cannot get it.

I do not want to press to a Division an amendment that seeks to impose the universal service obligation, because British Telecom's shareholders would not thank me for doing that. However, this matter is a real challenge, and I hope that the Minister will have the chance to say something about how we are going to meet it.

Mr Brian White (North East Milton Keynes, Labour)

The hon. Member for Maldon and East Chelmsford should be made aware that my constituency, which is a vibrant new city in south-east England, has had most of its exchanges enabled but most of the people in the area cannot get broadband. I have had a meeting about that with British Telecom—and one with NTL, because the cable company also cannot provide broadband for different technical reasons. Therefore, this problem exists not only in rural areas, but in urban areas too. There are technical problems that need to be addressed.

There should be a universal requirement on Ofcom. One of the main problems in this area has been the relationship between the telecom companies and Oftel with regard to looking at different technologies. Broadband is the issue of today, but it may not be the issue of tomorrow as it could be superseded by the next technological step forward. However, one of the key issues of the future will be how bandwidth is used.

There are alternative providers. I received something in the post this morning from Eutelsat, which will be a competitor to Sky: it will offer broadband at 1 megabit per second for £19.95 anywhere in the UK. There are competitors, and there will be market providers.

As the hon. Member for Maldon and East Chelmsford suggested, the key questions are what are the roles of Government and the regulatory authorities? The regulatory authorities, in providing universal service provision, have a duty here. That is why I have supported the amendment tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Anniesland.

We must ensure that bandwidth is the issue that is addressed, and that future technologies are addressed as well, rather than just broadband.

Mr Simon Thomas (Ceredigion, Plaid Cymru)

One of the difficulties with the Bill is that the Government have taken the standpoint that it is technologically neutral. That is fine in principle, but in practice it lets down several areas of the country. I accept that there are problems in defining broadband, and the point made by the hon. Member for Milton Keynes, North-East that technology will change so we must be careful about what is included in the Bill. His amendment has certain virtues because it refers to increasing bandwidth. It does not define technology narrowly, but would mean that, throughout the UK, Ofcom raises the universal service obligation of a low width or low data transmission service, which is insufficient for a modern economy.

Like the constituents of the hon. Member for Maldon and East Chelmsford, my constituents have

huge problems with all the advertising from BT, Freeserve and others offering broadband. I have one exchange in my entire constituency enabled for broadband. That was enabled by a European 5b project, and not BT at all.

A small light is on the horizon however, as in north Wales BT is pioneering small broadband adaptors that allow 10 or 12 rurally based users to come in on a small exchange. I hope that that will be introduced throughout Wales, and the rest of the United Kingdom, because it offers us an opportunity.

It is inevitable that most users will turn first to the telecom providers—BT in the main—to provide a broadband service. Although I am excited by the prospect of wireless and satellite broadband, the general population want to know whether they can get that from their telecom providers. That is why the amendments are important.

It is important that the Bill refers to bandwidth. I hope that the Government shift from their position that the Bill is technologically neutral, and accept that an obligation should be put on Ofcom to ensure that greater bandwidth is available to a greater number of people throughout the countries of the United Kingdom.

Mr John Robertson (Glasgow, Anniesland, Labour)

In speaking to my amendment No. 237, we must look ahead. Although my amendment is probing to find out where the Government stand, I also want to ensure that broadband, its extra use and increasing width, are referred to in the Bill, and that we do not have stick to the limit that is bought off the shelf in the marketplace. We must ensure that we cover future expansion.

I thank the hon. Member for Maldon and East Chelmsford for his comments. As an ex-CWU member—I was a member for 20 years—I am glad that the Tories are reading its publications. I also refer hon. Members to my registered interest as a member of Connect, which is the management union associated with the CWU. The ongoing BT-bashing, as opposed to attempting to understand the problems, is wearing thin.

We need to ensure that universal service is both significantly protected and extended. It is important that the Bill receives backing not only from this side, but the other.

Mr Andrew Robathan (Blaby, Conservative)

It is important that the Minister, who is expert on the subject, explains the DTI's position.- We are talking about the future of small and medium-sized enterprises throughout the UK—in my constituency and in others, including in those in Wales, so it is important to know what the champion of business will do to assist SMEs.

Mr Andrew Lansley (South Cambridgeshire, Conservative)

I have one point to make. I cannot see how we could include broadband and the universal service obligation under the clause. At this stage, we want to know not only about the extent to which Ofcom can deliver greater availability of broadband through market mechanisms, but about whether the Government are considering what happens when the European Commission conducts its review in 2005 of the universal service obligation. From annexe 5 of the

universal service directive, one can see that we may be approaching the point at which it is appropriate to take account of the availability of broadband in the USO.

Mr Michael Fabricant (Lichfield, Conservative)

I rise to say that there is an urgent need for broadband in urban as well as rural areas. In Brentwood, people are disadvantaged, and that is unfair.

Mr Stephen Timms (Minister of State (e-Commerce & Competitiveness), Department of Trade and Industry; East Ham, Labour)

I agree with everything that has been said about the importance—the central economic importance—of broadband in urban and rural areas. There are well over a million broadband connections in the UK, and the number is rising faster here than in most of the other countries on the list referred to by the hon. Member for Maldon and East Chelmsford. However, the Government are not complacent. The hon. Member for South Cambridgeshire is right: the time may come when broadband—

It being One o'clock, The Chairman proceeded, pursuant to Sessional Order C relating to programming [29 October 2002] and the Order of the Committee [10 December 2002], to put forthwith the Question already proposed from the Chair.

Amendment negatived.

The Chairman then proceeded to put forthwith the Questions necessary to dispose of the business to be concluded at that time.

Clauses 61 to 68 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Mr Roger Gale (North Thanet, Conservative)

As this is my last time in the Chair before the recess, I take this opportunity to wish all hon. Members an extremely happy Christmas and a peaceful new year.

Adjourned at One o'clock till this day at half-past Four o'clock.