The new Labour-led UK Government has somewhat echoed the previous administration today by calling on broadband operators to “end the deployment of unnecessary telegraph poles” when rolling out new gigabit-capable networks. But they have “at this stage” rejected the idea of removing Permitted Development (PD) rights for poles.
As we’ve said before, network operators typically like poles because they’re quick and cost-effective to build, can be deployed in areas where there may be no space or access to safely put new underground cables, are less disruptive (avoiding the noise, access restrictions and damage to pavements of street works) and can be built under PD rights with only minimal prior notice.
Suffice to say that poles, which have long been a common sight across much of the UK (well over 4 million exist), form a key part of how broadband operators are choosing to deploy new full fibre (FTTP) networks. The previous government, driven by its targets for expanding gigabit-capable broadband infrastructure, even facilitated this by cutting red tape to help make such work as easy as possible.
On the other hand, over the last 2-3 years, there’s been a notable rise in complaints about new poles, particularly from places like East Yorkshire and Greater Manchester. Such gripes typically highlight their negative visual appearance, as well as concerns about exposure to damage from major storms, the lack of effective prior consultation, the duplication of existing infrastructure or engineers that fail to follow safety rules while building etc.
The previous government responded to this during March 2024 (here) by issuing somewhat of a soft warning to network operators, which called on them to “limit [the] installation of telegraph poles” and to avoid “inappropriately or unnecessarily throwing up new infrastructure.”
In addition, they also pledged to “revise” the existing Code of Practice (as linked above) to “make sure that communities feel engaged in the deployment of new broadband infrastructure, whilst still allowing operators to continue deploying their networks” (i.e. more community meetings and better pre-build notifications could be the result, adding extra costs and time to network builds but not stopping them).
Change of Approach or More of the Same
The recent change of UK government has, until today, left a bit of a question mark over how this issue would be tackled. On the one hand, the new government has talked a big game around boosting investment by softening planning rules and making a “renewed push to fulfil the ambition of full gigabit [broadband] and national 5G coverage by 2030.” On the other hand, some of its MPs are vocal opponents of poles (example).
The new Telecoms Minister, Sir Chris Bryant, has today sought to end that uncertainty by calling on the industry to “share existing infrastructure when installing broadband cables as the default approach; and where new infrastructure is needed, to install underground wherever possible before deploying new telegraph poles.”
Bryant has also written an open letter to the industry (see bottom of article), which supports the previous plan to revise the Code of Practice so that companies “pay greater attention to the communities’ concerns.”
Chris Bryant, Telecoms Minister, said:
“Our dedication to rolling out fast and reliable broadband across the country is unwavering. But this must happen in a way that is mindful of local communities, many of whom have expressed dismay when their road is dug up yet again or yet another telegraph pole appears in their street.
This is why I’m calling on telecoms companies to prioritise the sharing of infrastructure and take into account the views of residents and businesses in rural areas.
By doing so, we can bring the advantages of high-speed internet to all corners of the nation more rapidly and responsibly, while minimising disruptive ground digging and ending the installation of unnecessary telegraph poles – ensuring communities’ concerns are not overlooked.”
An Openreach spokesperson said:
“The UK is undergoing a digital transformation, to world class full fibre broadband. To help companies build out their networks, we offer access to our national network of poles and underground ducts. To date over 100 companies are making use of our ducts and poles, and it’s enabled them to connect nearly 900,000 of their customers.
We welcome greater collaboration within the industry and believe all network builders should offer access on comparable terms to us, thereby reducing the need for new poles and duct in certain areas. However, there will be a need for new infrastructure to ensure some premises aren’t left behind. We’re looking forward to working with Government to ensure the digital transformation of the UK continues at pace, which will include improved infrastructure sharing.”
Bryant’s letter adds that he “will not shy away from changing the law, should companies fail to listen to communities” (i.e. a reference to the possibility of hardening or removing PD rights on poles). The minister next plans to meet representatives from Openreach (BT), Virgin Media (O2) and smaller networks on 12th September 2024 to discuss how they can better “put residents’ concerns at the forefront of their plans” via a revised Code of Practice.
However, most network operators would probably say they already do everything possible to share existing poles and ducts (Openreach’s network is widely re-used by rivals), since that’s a lot more cost-efficient than building new stuff. But this isn’t available to every location and sometimes local restrictions, as well as any limitations (commercial or practical) imposed by existing operators, mean that it’s not always possible (i.e. sometimes no viable underground alternatives exist to poles).
The existing Access to Infrastructure (ATI) Regulations 2016, which applies to all operators, already includes provisions on the exchange of information about existing infrastructure, and the right to access that infrastructure on fair and reasonable commercial terms etc. But this doesn’t matter much if a commercially viable deal cannot be reached. The recent efforts between Connexin and KCOM in Hull suggest that, with enough of a push, solutions can sometimes still be found (here).
The previous government attempted to correct the ATI regulations, but some smaller and more vulnerable alternative networks (altnets) said they were concerned about the risk of “unintended consequences” if changes to those rules ended up undermining their investment case for new networks (here). Such operators also expressed “limited interest in using non-Openreach or non-telecoms infrastructure” (i.e. it’s hard to beat Openreach’s regulated product).
In the end, the previous government opted to merely clarify the existing ATI rules and later pushed to update the Code of Practice, which seems to be the same approach as now being adopted by the new government. In fairness, given the extreme economic pressures facing network builders right now, there’s probably not much the government can do without damaging their own targets.
Copy of Chris Bryant’s Letter to Network Operators
Dear all,
I am writing to you following my appointment as Minister of State with responsibility for telecoms infrastructure.
As you will know, this Government wants to drive economic growth across the UK, and we see delivering fast and reliable broadband as crucial to this mission. We want to give communities across all four nations opportunities to work, learn and play in ways that wouldn’t previously be possible without it.
However, I am acutely aware of public concerns surrounding the deployment of telegraph poles. Many people are calling for the Government to remove permitted development rights for poles. I do not, at this stage, believe that this is the right move. I want to ensure that my Department does everything it can to support fast-paced rollout of digital infrastructure across the UK to meet the Government’s objectives.
However, at the same time, we must look to address the concerns that people across this country have expressed and recognise that unnecessary pole deployment is immensely frustrating for them. I am grateful for the industry coming together to reform the Cabinet Siting and Pole Siting Code of Practice, and the work you have already undertaken to drive this work forward.
This work should of course be done in cooperation with local planning authorities, highway authorities and other interested parties to make sure that a diverse range of voices are considered and so that the guidelines fall under regulation 17 of the Electronic Communications Code (Conditions and Restrictions) Regulations 2003. My officials would be happy to facilitate connections, in order for the Working Group to reach planning or highway authorities in order to consult them on changes to the Code of Practice.
While the contents of this revised Code of Practice are for your Working Group to design; it is my hope that a revised Code of Practice can set out examples of considerations that should be taken into account before new poles are deployed; and that it can be brought into effect this autumn to ensure that community voices can be taken into account.
A revised Code of Practice is vital to ensuring continued smooth broadband rollout. I would therefore like to invite you to a roundtable on 12 September to discuss this project with me. At that roundtable I would also appreciate your commitment that you will do everything possible to share infrastructure and deploy poles in a considerate way.
Should the revised Code of Practice fail to address those public concerns and lead to far greater infrastructure sharing and fewer unnecessary pole deployments; I will not hesitate to consider changing existing regulations or wider legislative options to ensure that communities’ concerns are taken into account when deploying infrastructure.
Sir Chris Bryant MP
Minister of State for Data Protection and Telecoms
UPDATE 8:33am
Added a comment from Openreach above.
