Clause 102 - Application of the electronic communications
Communications Bill
5:45 pm
Mr Stephen Timms (Minister of State (e-Commerce & Competitiveness), Department of Trade and Industry; East Ham, Labour)
I agree with the hon. Gentleman that the electronic communications code is an important part of the Bill. I am grateful to him for giving me the opportunity to say something about it.
For the most part, the Bill will continue to apply the telecommunications code set out in schedule 2 to the Telecommunications Act 1984, but it will adapt that for the new converging electronic communications regulatory regime. Like the 1984 Act, the electronic communications code gives network operators the rights that are essential if they are to build and maintain networks in a cost effective and efficient way. That remains important because civil engineering—digging trenches, making good roads—often constitutes more than 60 per cent. of the cost of extending a network.
Without the ability to apply the code, the additional costs and delays would raise the hurdles so high that the investment needed, especially for broadband and for the new mobile networks that the hon. Gentleman referred to, might make the cost prohibitive. That is particularly the case, not so much in Sheffield but in the more remote parts of the country where the business case for market investment is often quite marginal.
Earlier on in the debate, perhaps on Second Reading, the hon. Member for Maldon and East Chelmsford, or one of his hon. Friends, mentioned that the Broadband Stakeholder Group, in its November report, called for changes to enable the provision of civil infrastructure by third parties as an important step in facilitating investment in broadband. That is an important part of the reason why we are making the change that the hon. Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Mr. Allan) talked about. The change is a deregulatory move to allow the code to be applied not only to companies operating electronic communications networks, as was the case in the past, but to those offering access to conduits or other infrastructure to network operators.
Ofcom will be able to apply the code to a person who is not operating an electronic communications network, but who is in a position to contribute to the provision of such networks by providing the basic infrastructure. I hope that that will lead to a lower cost of roll-out of new networks. The hon. Gentleman asked whether that change is likely to be local or national in its impact. I expect that it will more often be taken advantage of in specific local circumstances.
Let me give some examples of possible developments. Existing utilities companies—gas or water companies—might want to take advantage of work that they plan to carry out for their own purposes to make available conduits for telecommunications networks. Local authorities—this might prove especially significant—might provide managed services directly as part of their activities as local highways authorities for the
promotion of well-being, and might set in the ground infrastructure that can be taken advantage of by network providers in the area. There might be public-private partnerships, in which a local or regional authority procures a managed infrastructure service for the promotion of well-being using the power now available to them. Purely commercial businesses might choose to construct infrastructure that network operators can take advantage of.
The change seems to be relatively small, but its impact could, as the hon. Member for Sheffield, Hallam says, be quite big. It could remove some of the current barriers to establishing the new infrastructure that we all want. The provision could be operated nationally, but I should think that it would more frequently be used locally.
The hon. Gentleman asks whether we might compel people to use infrastructure provided in that way. I do not think that we can do that. If a network operator thinks that it is better to construct a whole new network of its own than to use facilities already in place, it needs to have that opportunity. However, there will be a huge cost incentive to take advantage of any existing infrastructure rather than build new infrastructure, with the expense and the time involved in doing so. It would not be appropriate to force people to use existing infrastructure, but I think that the hon. Gentleman accepts that there are big commercial cost benefits if the opportunity to do so arises. The provision could give rise to a large and beneficial change and bring in some of the new investment that we want.