Decision details

The Superfast Broadband Lancashire Programme - Phase 1 and Phase 2 (Extension) Update

Decision Maker: Internal Scrutiny Committee

Decision status: Recommendations Approved

Is Key decision?: No

Decisions:

The Chair welcomed Gemma Johnson, Superfast Lancashire Project Manager, and, Richard Hothersall, Head of Service Programme Office, to the meeting.

 

The report outlined the outcome of Phase 1 delivery and the planned implementation of the Superfast Broadband Extension Programme (SEP)

 

Phase 1 would address 21% and SEP would now go on to address a further 2%, leaving 1% as the hardest to reach areas that had no Superfast Broadband (SFBB) plans. Phase 1 had been funded by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), BT, LCC and Broadband Delivery UK (BDUK).

 

Coverage of SFBB would have reached 136,051 premises by completion, and provided access to over 9,000 ERDF eligible SMEs. Over 900 structures had been built to deliver the SFBB across the white areas of Lancashire. The contract with BT measured speeds of over 24mbps to be deemed 'Superfast Broadband. Various technologies had been deployed to provide value for money.

 

One hundred plus priority business sites now had access to SFBB including enhanced connectivity at the Enterprise Zone sites. The £3m Business Support Programme targeted 355 SMEs to receive minimum of 12hours intensive business support. This target had been exceeded to 507 businesses.

 

The Superfast Extension Programme (SEP) would be worth a maximum of £7.68m and would be funded on a 50:50 basis by BDUK and LCC. There were three phases of delivery, each lasting 12 months, staggered to commence at 6 monthly intervals. Address level coverage would only be known once bulid was completed. The website management was to move from BT to LCC. A communications plan was also being developed.

 

The Satellite Broadband Subsidy Scheme was managed by BDUK and LCC to fund those premises which could not access an affordable broadband service (at least 2Mbps) and were unlikely to benefit from the current plans. Applicants applied online, and if eligible, once accessed by LCC, were awarded the subsidy towards the cost of equipment and installation of a satellite broadband connection. The purpose of the scheme was to keep customers costs below £400 for the first year of service. The customer would have a choice of ten Satellite providers (approved by BDUK for the scheme) to choose a service from, and would take out a minimum twelve month contract.

 

Regarding future activity, Superfast Lancashire was building on the success of Phase 1 and learning from it. It was exploring European Structural and Investment Funds 2014-20 and European Agricultural, Farming and Rural Development Fund funding options, and, cross programme working with Lancashire Growth Hub. As part of the publically funded rollout BT had signed up to a Gainshare mechanism whereby, an element of their revenues from Superfast Broadband take up could be invested in the white areas in Lancashire to further improve coverage.

 

 

 

 

 

Superfast Lancashire had been exploring options to deliver to the final 1% and had been in contact with the Independent Network Cooperative Association (INCA) whose members supported the development of independent digital networks and infrastructure, specifically that which is shared by different operators and providers, was open for use by competing operators or service providers or was owned by the communities or businesses that use it.

 

Councillors were invited to ask questions and raise any comments in relation to the report, a summary of which is provided below:

 

·  Regarding Enterprise Zones councillors enquired what the timescale was for Superfast rollout. They were informed that the deployment plan was still being worked on with BT. There were some priority sites one of which was Hillhouse Enterprise Zone. As soon as the plan was available Scrutiny Committee would be updated.

 

·  The Committee was informed there had been some damage caused by the recent floods. The flooding had caused a delay to the project. This was twofold. Some of the ducts that had been built had been saturated by the water. There had also been a delay in receiving power as Electricity North West had been involved in other flood damaged areas.

 

·  BDUK and LCC had invested £8m in the scheme. Barring the satellite option, which was £400, it was put to the Superfast Lancashire Team if this fully covered the installation costs. The cost for the customer should not exceed £400. The subsidy cost of £100 should cover the installation.

 

·  Members were informed that the 1% who had not got any build plans at the moment were the very rural elements but they were in the programme. There were about 7000 of these premises. More and more providers had come forward offering wireless or satellite functions. The Team were now looking at doing smaller bite size tender packages.

 

·  It was noted by the Committee that the Government had made a commitment to provide every home and business in the UK with access to a basic broadband service, at least 2Mbps download speed. Of the 1% who had not any build plans Members enquired how many were businesses. They felt we had to focus on the opportunities for businesses. They also felt that maybe it would be cheaper for these businesses to relocate. There were about 9000 ERDF eligible businesses. There were also another 3000 eligible businesses that were not on the footprint when the ERDF money was available. A quarter of these were now in the final percent. The Superfast Lancashire Team could only target ERDF eligible businesses because of the funding at the time. The Team promised to come back to the Scrutiny Committee with more details on the businesses.

 

·  Members were informed that all County Councillors were invited to the INCA event in October which might be held at County Hall. Details would be provided for them.

 

 

Resolved: The Scrutiny Committee is asked to consider the contents of the report.

 

Date of decision: 08/04/2016

Decided at meeting: 08/04/2016 - Internal Scrutiny Committee

Accompanying Documents: