Agenda item

Report of the Corporate Director of Resources – presented by the Head of ICT, Resources.

The Chairman introduced the Head of ICT Services, Phil Jackman who was in attendance to give an update as regards the Digital Durham Programme (for copy see file of minutes).

The Head of ICT Services thanked the Committee for the opportunity to provide an update in respect of the Digital Durham Programme and reminded Members of the 2 contracts with BT totalling £35million and the aspiration in terms of 100% coverage of superfast broadband, with download speeds in excess of 24Mbps.  Councillors recalled that the overall programme involved Durham County Council (DCC) and 9 other Local Authorities in order to create the critical mass required, noting that recently North and South Tyneside Councils had joined the programme.  It was added that while it would be unlikely to achieve 100% coverage, the estimate for the coverage in County Durham after the completion of the second contract with BT in July 2016 would be 96%, ahead of the government target of 90% for “Phase 1” and 95% for “Phase 2”.  It was added that Contract 1 would provide fibre to cabinet (FTC) for approximately 105,000 properties, the majority in County Durham and none being within North or South Tyneside, and that to date 450 cabinets had been built, serving approximately 100,000 properties.

The Committee noted that there had been investment in promoting the take up of superfast broadband as there was an ability to have a degree of “claw back” or “gain share” once take up was above 20%.  It was noted that currently the take up in County Durham was 21.84% and that eventually it was estimated that take up would be within the region of 30-35%.

Councillors noted that a budget of approximately £500,000 had been available in terms of offering satellite connection vouchers, and to date only 8 vouchers had been issued.  It was added that it was not thought this solution would have a huge take up as while the voucher would help with initial installation and setup cost, individuals would still be required to pay for the service.

The Head of ICT Services explained that Contact 2 would begin in July 2016 and this would extend the fibre infrastructure to a further 29,000 properties, including North and South Tyneside.  It was noted this would likely increase coverage to 98% for County Durham by the end of Contract 2 by December 2018.  Members noted this would leave approximately 4,500 properties within the County not able to access superfast broadband, of a total of around 240,000 properties.

Councillors noted that through gain share and underspends it was hoped to be able to provide further access to superfast broadband, a “Phase 3”, with approximately a further 4,381 premises within the programme area, the number of which would be within County Durham not being known at this time, however equating to £1.668million for County Durham out of £2.343million for the whole programme area.

The Head of ICT Services concluded by noting the success of the programme and adding that the properties remaining after completion of Contract 2 would be the more difficult to reach, in terms of being the more isolated hamlets and remote farmsteads within the County.

The Chairman thanked the Head of ICT Services for his update and asked why the second phase only added an extra 2% in terms of properties being able to access superfast broadband.  The Head of ICT noted that Digital Durham worked in parallel with BT and that where commercially viable, BT would provide the service, and where it was not, Digital Durham would then support the provision.

Councillor R Ormerod noted the excellent work of the programme and asked whether there was a role to play for Town and Parish Councils in terms of “hard to reach” areas to encourage take up, noting East Ridding Parish having paid for some rural broadband works.  The Head of ICT Services noted that a few Local Authorities had tried to maximise their uptake of broadband services via business parks and within town centre, against advice from Digital Durham.  It was added that there was a community broadband scheme to help “close the gap” in terms of rural broadband, however, and any interest in such a scheme would be useful.

The Chairman noted that there was an element of those hard to reach rural areas being those areas that would benefit most from such a superfast connection.

Councillor E Adam noted the poor take up in terms of the satellite vouchers and asked if there was any work ongoing to try and encourage people to take up this option. 

The Head of ICT Services noted that there was already a viable commercial market for satellite provision, and there were some issues of performance, namely latency, that may negatively affect popular uses of broadband provision, gaming and streaming of television and video calling.  It was added that the funding made available for this would not be lost, rather rolled forward into “Phase 3”.

Councillor D Hall asked as regards feedback on the take up of broadband, any reasons why it had not been taken up, and what this meant in terms of paying for the investment.  The Head of ICT Services noted that the model was a “gap-funding” one and on an assumption of a 20% take up to recoup investment, take up over 20% would result in a  per property amount coming back to the Council with customers still paying the same price as per advertised tariffs.

Councillor J Armstrong noted the continuing situation in terms of provision in the Newton Hall and Framwellgate Moor areas, and also with slow speeds in areas within his electoral division.  The Head of ICT Services explained that the Newton Hall area was one that fell within a BT Commercial area and added he believed they had experienced issues in terms of power supplies.  It was added Members could contact the Digital Durham e-mail, or the Head of ICT Services, in terms of any specific issues in their area.

Councillor J Clare asked as regards the roll out of provision in rural areas, and also issues where fibre had been installed to cabinets within an area, and BT had noted there were “no free ports”.  Councillor J Clare asked whether this was a more general problem and gave an example he gave within his area, Ryder Court, Newton Aycliffe and whether this was not an area Digital Durham could assist with.  The Head of ICT Services noted that in areas that had been enabled there was a process of leaflet drops to explain what was being provided and that people would need to pay to upgrade.  It was added that once cards within cabinets were full there was an issue, with around 40 cabinets with that issue in the County.  The Head of ICT Services explained that there had been some updates in this regard, and that he would look at those areas highlighted by Councillor J Clare and get back to him directly.

Councillor E Tomlinson asked the Head of ICT Services to give some further information as regards the wireless programme at Teesdale.  The Head of ICT noted that the Digital Dales programme had begun 6-7 years ago, with funding via the Regional Development Fund (RDF).  It had required take up of around 1,000 properties to “break even” and there had been less than 140 taking up that scheme and noted that sustainability was an issue, with the wireless programme being £45 per property in contrast to the price with BT starting at around £15.  Councillor D Hall asked if there were any plans for the Council to be a provider in terms of broadband.  The Head of ICT Services noted that this had been considered, however, the market was noted as being highly competitive and the focus of the Council on providing addition to GVA would be better in terms of impact on this issue.  The Head of ICT Services noted that funding was capital and could only be spent providing infrastructure. 

Councillor H Nicholson noted the work of the Digital Durham Programme and the serious investment that had been made, and that the overall impact of Digital Durham had been positive.  The Head of ICT Services noted that while it would be unlikely to ever achieve 100% coverage, the aim was to try and provide this and work hard to maximise uptake.

Resolved:   

That the report be noted.