If you followed our live coverage of last night’s Cabinet meeting, you’ll know that members voted in favour of appointing BT as their preferred bidder for the rollout of Next Generation Access (NGA) rural broadband.
The Cabinet member responsible, Cllr Shirley Smart, said she believed that,
“Due and proper process had been followed in reaching the recommendation.”
She went on to add,
“We will also be hiring officers to ensure the management of this project is robust.
“BT will be contractually bound to deliver on their promises and officers will ensure that this is the case.”
The amendments
The vote included the following amendment to the original recommendation.
The amendment: Option (a) (i)
(i) Approve BT as the preferred supplier to deliver the Isle of Wight NGA broadband project subject to BDUK and state aid approval and satisfactory agreement on any final matters in respect of the inter-relationship with the highways PFI and complete the capital grant agreement with the government (Department of Culture Media and Sport) to secure £3.09 million match funding
(ii) Specifically the Cabinet requires the project to meet the following criteria:
(a) A joint investment of £6.4 million to deploy superfast broadband across the intervention area on the Island.
(b) A £1.2 million Innovation Fund under the control of the council.
(c) 99% of premises across the Island will have NGA infrastructure deployed by September 2015.
(d) 100% of premises to receive a minimum of 2mpbs
(e) 97% of premises in the intervention area to have an NGA connection (min 30 mbps) post project
(f) 87% of premises in the intervention area to have immediate access to superfast broadband speeds (min 24 mbps) post project
(g) Potential for at least 60 ISP providers in the intervention area
(h) 96% of premises on Isle of Wight to have immediate access to superfast broadband speeds (min 24 mbps) post project
(i) A robust protocol between the council, the supplier (BT Openreach) and Island Roads to ensure highways are not dug up twice (or more) to provide for cost savings.
(j) Planned completion of the main roll out by September 2015
(k) Dedicated BT project lead and support appropriate to the roll out programme.
(l) Continued benefits from BT’s development of new technologies and products as they become available.
“Dislike of BT” driving opposition
Following the recommendation being made by Cllr Smart, Cllr Jonathan Bacon was the first Cabinet member to speak on the motion and its amendment.
He said,
“There has been much criticism and debate over the last month and indeed before. Having read – not all of it – but an awful lot of it, I think that most of that has come forward, on the basis of a dislike of BT as an Internet Service Provider and a belief that they will not meet the representations that have been put forward.”
“They will be held to account”
Cllr Bacon went on to say,
“What the alternative option that is before us today does, is to clarify and specify what is required and what will be written into any contract that may be finally agreed with BT. If BT cannot meet those requirements they shouldn’t enter into the contract. If they do and they fail to meet those requirements, they will be held to account. Plain and simple.”
Providing infrastructure
Moving on, he added,
“What could further be stressed is that this is about providing Next Generation Access infrastructure. Something that I think has been missed out in much of the public debate and is to provide that infrastructure where there is no commercial case for doing so.
“That’s where others have fallen by the wayside.
“Once the infrastructure is there, it can be employed by whatever Internet Service Provider (ISP) that a member of the public wants to get broadband from and chooses to use. It is to be a requirement that there’s a potential for at least 60 ISPs to be available. I’m not sure there are that many, but if there are they can all be accessed through this service.”
He finished by saying,
“Maybe it’s not perfect but what is these days, but with strict requirements that are set out in that alternative option, I agree with what has been said by Cllr Smart that it is a very important step forward for this Island.”
Put to the vote
The motion received verbal support from Cllr Lumley as chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and Cllr Priest.
Without any further discussion, it was taken to the vote.
Cllrs Smart, Priest, Kendall, Gilbey and Bacon all voted in favour of appointing BT as the preferred bidder for NGA rural broadband roll-out subject to the conditions of the amendment.
Cllrs Stubbings, Jordan and Hillard abstained from voting.
Questions over amendments
Some points that may be worth highlighting are that …
Item (c) “99% of premises across the Island will have NGA infrastructure deployed by September 2015” specifically refers to infrastructure and does necessarily not mean NGA speeds will be delivered to 99% of premises on the Island.
Item (e) “97% of premises in the intervention area to have an NGA connection (min 30 mbps) post project” refers to ‘post project’ but does not give any deadline. Is it a few weeks post project, months or could it be years?
It’s also worth pointing out that Item (k) “Dedicated BT project lead and support appropriate to the roll out programme” will incur (as previously reported) an approximate £200,000 cost to the council over the lifetime of the project.
Did BT have a hand in preparing the amendments?
The last amendment item is a little curious and one that was picked up by an OnTheWight reader earlier today.
Specifically, it states that “Continued benefits from BT’s development of new technologies and products as they become available” be included in the criteria.
It was suggested by ‘Man in Black’ that BT staff may’ve had a hand in preparing the amendment. This was quickly refuted by deputy leader of the council, Cllr Steve Stubbings (who abstained from the vote last night), who replied
“The amended motion was drafted by members from the report provided (including BT’s tender), in an effort to tighten up the terms under which any future contract would be negotiated… No representative of BT was involved.”
Image: Modern Relics under CC BY 2.0
