PREVIOUS PAGE

This article was published in PC Plus issue 156 (Oct 99), and is reproduced here for information purposes only.

This is the original copy which was sent to the magazine, not the subbed version which appeared on the page. 

paul@paulspages.co.uk
www.paulspages.co.uk

Paul Stephens column, PC Plus October 99 (on sale 1st September)

In this column I describe how Oftel is forcing BT to open up access to its local loop phone network. 

I'm developing a real admiration for Oftel, the telecomms industry regulator. This is partly because it writes its consultation documents in refreshingly clear English (and if, like me, you've tried deciphering the output of the W3C Web standards organisation, you'll understand just how refreshing that can be). It's mainly, however, because Oftel really does seem to be winning its battle against the mighty BT, and bringing true competition to the UK market.

                The reason it's winning is that it hasn't been scared to take decisions which are deeply injurious to BT's vested interests, and thus likely to incur the wrath of the telecomms giant. It took one when it imposed the network interconnection rates which made free ISPs possible. Now it's on the point of taking a far more drastic one, which will, in effect, break BT's monopoly over the 'local loop' of copper cables between its exchanges and our homes and offices.

Back in December 1998, Oftel issues a consultation document entitled Access to Bandwidth. This contained five options for delivering high bandwidth (data rate) connections to domestic and small business customers over BT lines within five years. The first two options involved giving BT's competitors direct access rights to its network - 'unbundling the loop', in telecomms jargon. The other three were variations on the theme of leaving BT in sole control of the loop, able to make decisions about when, where and how to upgrade it, and honour-bound to offer new service capabilities on a 'wholesale' basis to competing providers.

                There are no prizes for guessing which group of options BT favoured, or which were championed by everyone else. Less certain, however, was which way Oftel would go. The extremely good news is that it's come down - provisionally at least - in favour of option 2, an unbundling scheme which would give third-party service providers physical access to BT's local loop (for details, see "Access to Bandwidth: Proposals for Action", at http://www.oftel.gov.uk/competition/llu0799.htm).

The proposal means that, from July 2001, BT's competitors would have the right to design their own upgrades to BT's network (subject to technical standards), install their own equipment at both the exchange and subscriber ends of BT's lines, lease the upgraded lines from BT at an Oftel-controlled rate, then offer services, such as flat-rate Net access, direct to the consumer. In effect BT would lose control over the type of services its local loop delivered, how much those services cost, and when they became available.

There's no doubt that this is a slap in face to BT, and one which reflects Oftel's, and the industry's, impatience with the company's behaviour over the past few years. During that time it's talked a lot about the fantastic results it can achieve with DSL (Digital Subscriber Line) technology, which turns ordinary phone lines into megabit superhighways. However the only Highway it's actually been offering its customers has been the slow, overpriced, ISDN-based Home/Business version. With no firm dates forthcoming for a rollout of DSL services, it's begun to look as if BT is quite happy to sit back, invest next to nothing and milk the cash cow of dial-up access, while relying on the threat of DSL to deter rival network operators, such as the cable companies, from making major infrastructure investments of their own.

Without Oftel's intervention, BT might have been tempted to hold out for as long as it could against implementing DSL, on the grounds that it doesn't make good business sense to waste money on equipment upgrades just to improve services to customers who have no choice but to deal with you anyway. Instead, in the wake of Oftel's December 98 document it suddenly revealed (to Oftel, though not to anyone else) an ambitious plan to roll out ADSL (Asymmetric DSL) on a scale which would, in Oftel's estimation, "represent a massive leap forward in the provision of high bandwidth, and give the UK a basic framework that is in advance of any other country". That must have been a very tempting offer, but of course there was a catch - the plan was only feasible if Oftel plumped for Option 4, one of the proposals which would leave BT with an iron grip on its local network.

                To Oftel's eternal credit it's called BT's bluff, saying that, yes, it really ought to get on with rolling out ADSL, but no, it doesn't see why that should be dependent on it retaining absolute control of the loop. In doing so it's probably saved us from five more years of low-bandwidth procrastination by our dominant telecomms provider, and for that we should be deeply, and eternally, grateful.

                If Oftel's proposals go through, then in less than two years we should be able to choose whose Net connectivity service we have delivered down our BT cables, just as we can already choose whose gas we have delivered down our British Gas Transco pipes. The chances of that resulting in affordable, high-speed, permanently-connected Net access for virtually everyone are an order of magnitude higher than if BT is left in sole charge of timescales and technologies.

[ENDS]

(C) Paul Stephens 1999. All rights reserved.