The government, last year announced that everyone in the UK should have the legal right to request a minimum broadband speed of 10mbps by the end of this parliament. This was welcome news for those living in rural locations with abysmal internet speeds. Mr Vaizey said that no matter where someone lived this should be their right, and hinted that this could be in force as early as next year.
Fast forward a year later and Ed Vaizey is starting to back track on such claims saying “I’m not going to guarantee to you that every single premise is going to get 10 Mpbs but it should be potentially possible.”
This came to light when MP’s on the Culture, Media & Sport committee questioned whether this was a realistic possibility. He suggested that perhaps a limit would have to be placed on the public funding to some hard to reach places, telling the committee “There would be a potential cap on the amount of public funding if a particular connection will cost many thousands of pounds.”
This news comes just days after the broadband targets set back in 2010 were realised. You can read our full article on that here.
Whilst the broadband infrastructure has undoubtedly improved massively in recent years, those living in rural communities have often felt left behind and forgotten about. With the Rural Urban digital divide ever growing.
Those living in rural areas were understandably pleased about the promise of a minimum legal speed for everyone last year, and will now be feeling once again let down. Whilst the government is on track with its claims of superfast broadband delivered to 95% of homes by 2017, those with the poorest connections to begin with will lose out yet again.
Ed Vaizey, in a move which could perhaps be seen as trying to deflect from these recent changes has blasted misleading speed claims by internet providers such as Sky and Talk Talk, in order to entice customers. He told the Culture, Media & Sport committee:
“It’s ridiculous. The idea that if you can deliver to 10% of houses the broadband speeds you are advertising on a large billboard and get away with it seems to be a complete and utter joke, and I have told that to their [that’d be the ASA] face.”
Internet Service Providers have a habit of advertising their services with an ‘up to’ speed rather than a realistic claim in order to entice new customers. The further away a customer is from the exchange, the slower the speeds achievable are.
Perhaps customers should be charged in accordance with the speeds they receive? After all, why should the small percentage of people living in these ‘hard to reach’ rural communities have to pay the same price as those that receive broadband speeds they can only dream of? It seems fair that they should only have to pay for what they receive, why should they pay the same price as everyone else when they receive a sub standard service based on their geographical location?