The thing is that if they stop now they fail. The USC won't be met.
Therefore, it is important that pressure is maintained on the politicians to meet the USC.
It is our best hope of getting decent broadband in rural areas.
It would also be an advantage if the USC was increased to maintain the pressure in years to come.
The USC is the lever for improvement.

For the USC the Phase 1 money should have been sufficient with the commercial risk of paying more than they expected to achieve it falling on BT. If the contracts allow them to renege on this it is scandalous,

Edited by deleted (Sun 15-Mar-15 12:46:57)

Increasing the USC would be a major contract change and give BT the total right to extend the deadline.

I've said all along that USC was going to involve some satellite, and if BT took the decision am sure vouchers would appear in a few weeks for those who wanted it.

If people are honest, what did we expect in 2010 with the Labour USC for 2012, i.e. they had 18 months but the body (BDUK) had literally just been set-up and no contracts even signed or out to tender.

In terms of harm to the UK economy, should we spend a few hundred for every business and home that wants the USC speed in the short term, or is a higher speed a better goal, but where some have to wait longer?

USC and Superfast are both things people want NOW and they don't want to pay a lot

I would say the USC is a need (even if now a bit too slow), Superfast is a want.

MrSaffron

An interesting point.

If the cost of power issue connected with FTTRN can not be resolved, then it's genuinely open to question as to what, if any, involvement BT will have in North Yorkshire beyond the end of phase two. The report presented to a meeting of the Executive of the County Council back in November last year made the position clear, without FTTRN available at an acceptable cost, the County Council could commit all the remaining funds to a phase three with BT, but they would probably only secure access to superfast broadband for a further 3,800 premises out of a total of 41,500 without access to superfast broadband at the end of phase two. Perhaps, the Airwave trials will offer a more practical and pragmatic way forward in terms of coverage, costs and timescales, not only in terms of superfast broadband, but also a meaningful USC.

I am not suggesting increasing the USC for phase 2 or even phase 3 but as the technology improves it should be kept as an option.
Regarding not meeting the USC in the first phase this was always going to happen. I think a rush to satellite would be a great mistake.
It will be far better to ensure that phases 2 and 3 deliver decent broadband for all, regardless of their location.

At the budget to day the target was confirmed as the sneaked in delayed by one year date of 2016

At the budget it was a USO of 5Mb, not a USC.

A big difference between the O and the C.