Key data on online engagement: platformOn platform: 76 members, 37 discussions, 324 comments2 Special initiatives:- Crowdsourcing ideas to reduce the costs of broadband rollout (25 answers)- Commentable case studies on NGA business models (8 answers) Most discussed: Most active: How can we bring high speed connections to rural areas? 91 Lorne Mitchell Go for fibre, but not any fibre 26 Charles Watt Crowdsourcing ideas to reduce the costs of broadband rollout 24 Elizabeth Tait How can investment in High speed Internet connectivity help creating jobs and fight Michael Mulquin unemployment? 22 2020 Vision 18 Efstratios Kehayas Costs - but also revenues 12 We need many more local internet exchanges! 12 Roger Williams Montis proposal of keeping investments for BB and EDA out of fiscal compact: what do you think? 11 Frits Bussemaker
Key data on online engagement: twitterMost Most activeRT
Topic 1: Reducing the cost of broadband rollout 25 ideas crowdsourced
Headlines from the group ”High speed connections” Topic 1: Reducing the cost of broadband rollout Challenges• Cultural: Need for joined-up thinking and cultural change across government(convincing road works department about need to lay ducts)• Business: ensuring collaboration between ISP is very difficult• Organizational: more clarity on the different responsibilities for digging, ducts andmaintainance, conditions for use• Legal: clarification on State Aid rules which can create strong delays• Leadership: understanding of the issue at stake by governmentQuote: As a wise man once said, in Washington (and Brussels?), the future hasno lobbyists. Stian Westlake. (Nesta)
Topic 1: Reducing the cost of broadband rolloutActions recommended BETTER COORDINATION: Develop an EU framework for utility code powers Simplifying the task of checkingfor existing services and for alternative networks laying new infrastructure.Example: Catalonia, Paris Promote long-term planning and clear information about intrastructure databasesand atlases NEW MODELS: Ensure network openness and new business models, for example by ensuringaccess to infrastructures owned by entities outside the telecom sector (e.g. publicdomain, utility sectors and railways) or carrier-neutral providers (e.g. SwedishOpenNet model, Reggefiber, Enet.ie ) Separate civil works from services: civil works provider can be undertaken by amunicipality or a region – any service provider would then get access to the fibre Adopt alternative measures such as new spectrum opportunities, crowdfunding QUOTE: “What are the social and economic benefits or what would be the cost ifwe DONT roll out fibre!”
Headlines from the group ”High Speed Connections” Topic 2: Recommendations 1. Level playing field. Encourage member states to drive their 2020 Digital Agenda programmes with a "hardest first" agenda - This encouragesnew competition as the final few % is where the traditional business model fails, so subsidising incumbents is least value for money - it also forces theincumbents to use more of their own money to reach further, defending their territory 2. Develop an EU framework for utility code powers Simplifying the task of checking for existing services and for alternative networks laying newinfrastructure. - This means incumbents become responsible for knowing where their infrastructure is and for telling anyone who asks - if they dont telland it gets dug up, tough - so it helps the smaller players and aids transparency, and would become a template for duct sharing and civils. 3. Develop an EU agreement that member tax & regulatory regimes should be encouraging investment towards a future copper switch-off - Thismeans business rates on new fibre is bad, regulators pushing ADSL2 into rural areas is bad, (as it wont help those on long lines) and droppingregulated prices on copper is bad 4. Create a common language for describing NGA services so that consumers receive what they expect - Discouraging coaxial and VDSL servicesfrom being call simply "fibre" and misleading policy makers and consumers. UP TO marketing should be discouraged or completely banned. Telcosshould also be able to provide information about connectivity in every area and not just a broad sweep of properties connected to exchanges. Weneed clarity, not weasel words. 5. Expand the language defining NGA in the EU Broadband Guidelines to make clear the common view that public investment in NGA shouldachieve a fundamental step-change and not an evolutionary incremental improvement. - Member states have to accept that public subsidy can onlybe used once to affect a major change, and not a periodic, evolutionary incremental change - that state aid is a single bite at the cherry, so if VDSL ischosen, the commercial player receiving the subsidy knows they cant receive more in a few years time to top them up again, and the local authorityhas to realise this too.