Brit broadband grilling descends into farce over targets and definitions
(2025/12/18)
- Reference: 1766047073
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2025/12/18/broadband_telecoms_committee/
- Source link:
If UK readers are perplexed by the country's seemingly shambolic state of broadband and telecoms, relative to other European nations, insight can be gleaned from a one-off evidence session conducted by Parliament.
The Science, Innovation and Technology Committee of the UK Parliament [1]held a session last week questioning the government minister for digital economy, Baroness Liz Lloyd CBE, on its plans for telecoms and broadband, and wider issues of digital inclusion – although you could be forgiven for thinking it was an episode of Yes Minister.
Chair of the committee Dame Chi Onwurah started by asking about cellular coverage, noting that the government's aim in its Proposed Statement of Strategic Priorities (SSP) is to have high-quality [2]standalone 5G in all populated areas of the UK by 2030. She asked what that meant.
[3]
Sadly, Baroness Lloyd struggled to articulate what "high-quality standalone 5G" means. She offered that "standalone 5G, which is sometimes called 5G-plus, is the next capability on from 5G. It allows much better data transfer."
[4]
[5]
When the chair inquired what "high-quality" means, Baroness Lloyd answered that it means the same thing as standalone 5G, leading to some confusion.
"High-quality means standalone?" asked Dame Onwurah, to which the answer was "yes."
[6]
"In the statement 'high-quality standalone 5G,' 'high-quality' and 'standalone' mean the same thing?" Dame Onwurah pressed.
"I am sorry. I cannot define 'high-quality' other than in that way." Baroness Lloyd responded.
The chair then asked how populated areas were defined, and Kevin Adams, Interim Director for Digital Infrastructure at the Department of Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT), responded that this excluded remote areas where there are few or no people living.
[7]
"How would you define few or no people?" she asked, to which he replied: "I am sorry. I do not have the exact definition."
Dame Onwurah then moved on, pointing out that most ordinary people do not care what the technology is, but do care about what they can do and whether they can access a decent level of broadband. She asked whether the country has the digital infrastructure necessary to support the government's ambitions on growth both regionally and nationally.
Baroness Lloyd claimed the UK has very good digital infrastructure, with great datacenter capabilities, and we the country now has "good mobile coverage that benchmarks pretty well with the EU and comparable countries."
This will probably come as news to many Brits, especially as the UK's 5G networks were found to be [8]among the worst in Europe when it comes to download speed, upload speed, latency, and packet loss, as we reported earlier this year.
There then followed more confusion as the chair asked what expectation there is for decent 4G and broadband coverage across the country.
"The target was [9]95 percent from at least one operator ," Baroness Lloyd answered.
But the 95 percent figure includes all mobile operators, Dame Onwurah shot back, and the vast majority of people subscribe to only one network. What coverage should someone on just one network expect to be able to experience?
"We do not have a single per-operator ambition," was the answer.
The chair explained that her research has revealed inadequate coverage in several sparsely populated areas of Northumberland. She asked whether there are plans to extend decent coverage to these underserved regions.
"As we move to 5G and others, you will not necessarily have more coverage," came the response.
Adams explained: "We do not have a specific government ambition. The ambition that we have, which you have quoted, has already been met and surpassed. Clearly, the ambition is for that to continue to improve."
"Under the [10]Shared Rural Network , we are addressing some of those not-spots. We are trying to improve on a number of fronts. We have not defined a specific government ambition beyond that," he said.
Attention subsequently turned to [11]Project Gigabit , with MP Freddie van Mierlo asking if everything was on track to meet the government's target of having gigabit-capable broadband available to 99 percent of UK premises by 2032. ("Available" meaning it is in your area, so you could sign up for it if you wish.)
"As far as I can see, we have good funded plans to keep the momentum through the period of the spending review. We will take the next funding decisions at the end of that spending review period to complete the project. We will see where the commercial market is and the funding needed to complete that," Baroness Lloyd stated.
The spending review covers government expenditure until 2029‑30 for capital investment.
But van Mierlo claimed that areas like his Oxfordshire constituency are currently below target, and asked if there were any further interventions the government is planning to address this.
"The priority is to continue with the plans as we have today," Baroness Lloyd replied. "Those plans will not meet the target," van Mierlo answered back.
The baroness said the government would need to look at how it can fill any gaps, once it comes to the next period, to which van Mierlo asked about any possible successor program.
"My understanding is that Project Gigabit will continue. What we have sight of is the funding for the next few years," she responded.
There followed a back-and-forth between the two where van Mierlo tried to get an answer for how the shortfall in the government target would be addressed, especially in his constituency, which was halted by the chair asking for a letter from the government outlining its plans for what would happen between 2030, when the funding runs out, and 2032, the target date for delivery.
Later, van Mierlo said only around half the population have taken up full-fiber broadband in areas where it is available. He asked if this was a risk to the government's agenda in terms of growth and other capabilities, and whether there is a need to push adoption further.
Baroness Lloyd said the government's approach was more "showing opportunity and encouraging people, not forcing people to go digital." But this isn't entirely true, since the government wants to [12]switch off the analog phone network .
[13]Whitehall rejects £1.8B digital ID price tag – but won't say what it will cost
[14]UK tech minister vows more whole-government megadeals after £9B Microsoft pact
[15]UK digital ID plan gets a price tag at last – £1.8B
[16]Calls grow for inquiry into UK data watchdog after MoD leak
van Mierlo then turned to a recurring hobby horse for politicians - [17]telephone or utility poles . Some areas are being left out of the network upgrade, he claimed, because residents do not want the infrastructure installed if that means new poles being erected. Is the government doing something to address this?
The baroness informed him that DSIT has "engaged with Ofcom and with the industry on the reuse of existing infrastructure," and hinted that planning-type reforms is one of the "things that we are looking at."
Another committee member, MP Adam Thompson, asked if regulator Ofcom was doing enough to promote competition in the broadband market.
In answer, Baroness Lloyd said the government had "seen the benefits of competition in the broadband market," it wants to build on the progress seen, and has highlighted some of the aspects Ofcom needs to have in mind for the next phase of the broadband rollout.
A stumbling block came when Thompson asked how DSIT intends to measure if competition is working in the UK broadband marketplace.
"Ofcom, in the telecoms access review, decides that," Adams said. "DSIT, in the statement of strategic priorities, sets the strategic framework for Ofcom."
"In that case, does Ofcom have a means by which it can measure that?" Thompson shot back.
"That is probably more a question for Ofcom," Baroness Lloyd responded.
At this point, the chair intervened to note that [18]Ofcom set out three different layers of competition , and Area 2 regions, where there is potential for sustainable competition but it has not yet been realized in 90 percent of the country. She asked whether the minister foresees a point where we will have actual competition somewhere in the country.
"The reason that there are those tiers is in anticipation of there being changes. It allows for the potential that that might happen. I would not want to talk about the time horizon for that or get into the weeds of that," said Baroness Lloyd.
Does this mean the government has no particular ambition for a level of competition across the country? To which the baroness confirmed: "That is correct."
"I do find that surprising, given how important competition is for driving innovation, take-up, consumer choice, et cetera," the chair said. "The government are stepping back from any responsibility or ambition to drive competition across the country?"
"We have an ambition to drive competition, but just like with other areas of competition policy, we do not set specific levels or metrics ourselves," Baroness Lloyd stated.
MP Daniel Zeichner asked about the role of mobile and satellite in achieving the government's vision for UK broadband. In particular, he noted that Starlink has achieved considerable reach, and inquired about the government's investment in OneWeb.
"You are right that we did make a very significant investment in OneWeb," the baroness responded, but added: "I do not feel terribly prepared to answer that question today on our role in OneWeb. I may have to come back to you."
In fact, the UK government sank £500 million (over $600 million) into [19]bailing out OneWeb when Boris Johnson was Prime Minister . The firm later [20]merged with rival Eutelsat , which currently has [21]ambitions to challenge Starlink on satellite broadband delivery. However, the government [22]chose Starlink instead for a trial to serve users in "hard to reach" locations around the country.
The session continued like this until it timed out - a term familiar to many people in locations with crappy network services. ®
Get our [23]Tech Resources
[1] https://committees.parliament.uk/event/25802/formal-meeting-oral-evidence-session/
[2] https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/02/bt_5g_standalone_2030/
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2aUPezigTh0tCvRuoCOHiGwAAAFI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aUPezigTh0tCvRuoCOHiGwAAAFI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aUPezigTh0tCvRuoCOHiGwAAAFI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aUPezigTh0tCvRuoCOHiGwAAAFI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aUPezigTh0tCvRuoCOHiGwAAAFI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2025/07/08/britains_5g_experience_among_the/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2024/06/03/uk_may_not_hit_goal/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2020/03/09/govt_and_carriers_formalise_plans_for_rural_shared_4g_network/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2021/03/19/uk_project_gigabit/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2024/05/21/bt_delays_deadline_for_digital/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2025/12/09/uk_digital_id_costs/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2025/12/08/uk_tech_deals/
[15] https://www.theregister.com/2025/11/28/digital_id_cost/
[16] https://www.theregister.com/2025/11/25/ico_inquiry_afghan_mod/
[17] https://www.theregister.com/2024/09/16/uk_telegraph_poles/
[18] https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/21/ofcom_no_big_changes_to/
[19] https://www.theregister.com/2021/03/25/uk_pm_johnson_relucant_to/
[20] https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/26/eutelsat_oneweb/
[21] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/20/eutelsat_funding/
[22] https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/01/uk_starlink_testing/
[23] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
The Science, Innovation and Technology Committee of the UK Parliament [1]held a session last week questioning the government minister for digital economy, Baroness Liz Lloyd CBE, on its plans for telecoms and broadband, and wider issues of digital inclusion – although you could be forgiven for thinking it was an episode of Yes Minister.
Chair of the committee Dame Chi Onwurah started by asking about cellular coverage, noting that the government's aim in its Proposed Statement of Strategic Priorities (SSP) is to have high-quality [2]standalone 5G in all populated areas of the UK by 2030. She asked what that meant.
[3]
Sadly, Baroness Lloyd struggled to articulate what "high-quality standalone 5G" means. She offered that "standalone 5G, which is sometimes called 5G-plus, is the next capability on from 5G. It allows much better data transfer."
[4]
[5]
When the chair inquired what "high-quality" means, Baroness Lloyd answered that it means the same thing as standalone 5G, leading to some confusion.
"High-quality means standalone?" asked Dame Onwurah, to which the answer was "yes."
[6]
"In the statement 'high-quality standalone 5G,' 'high-quality' and 'standalone' mean the same thing?" Dame Onwurah pressed.
"I am sorry. I cannot define 'high-quality' other than in that way." Baroness Lloyd responded.
The chair then asked how populated areas were defined, and Kevin Adams, Interim Director for Digital Infrastructure at the Department of Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT), responded that this excluded remote areas where there are few or no people living.
[7]
"How would you define few or no people?" she asked, to which he replied: "I am sorry. I do not have the exact definition."
Dame Onwurah then moved on, pointing out that most ordinary people do not care what the technology is, but do care about what they can do and whether they can access a decent level of broadband. She asked whether the country has the digital infrastructure necessary to support the government's ambitions on growth both regionally and nationally.
Baroness Lloyd claimed the UK has very good digital infrastructure, with great datacenter capabilities, and we the country now has "good mobile coverage that benchmarks pretty well with the EU and comparable countries."
This will probably come as news to many Brits, especially as the UK's 5G networks were found to be [8]among the worst in Europe when it comes to download speed, upload speed, latency, and packet loss, as we reported earlier this year.
There then followed more confusion as the chair asked what expectation there is for decent 4G and broadband coverage across the country.
"The target was [9]95 percent from at least one operator ," Baroness Lloyd answered.
But the 95 percent figure includes all mobile operators, Dame Onwurah shot back, and the vast majority of people subscribe to only one network. What coverage should someone on just one network expect to be able to experience?
"We do not have a single per-operator ambition," was the answer.
The chair explained that her research has revealed inadequate coverage in several sparsely populated areas of Northumberland. She asked whether there are plans to extend decent coverage to these underserved regions.
"As we move to 5G and others, you will not necessarily have more coverage," came the response.
Adams explained: "We do not have a specific government ambition. The ambition that we have, which you have quoted, has already been met and surpassed. Clearly, the ambition is for that to continue to improve."
"Under the [10]Shared Rural Network , we are addressing some of those not-spots. We are trying to improve on a number of fronts. We have not defined a specific government ambition beyond that," he said.
Attention subsequently turned to [11]Project Gigabit , with MP Freddie van Mierlo asking if everything was on track to meet the government's target of having gigabit-capable broadband available to 99 percent of UK premises by 2032. ("Available" meaning it is in your area, so you could sign up for it if you wish.)
"As far as I can see, we have good funded plans to keep the momentum through the period of the spending review. We will take the next funding decisions at the end of that spending review period to complete the project. We will see where the commercial market is and the funding needed to complete that," Baroness Lloyd stated.
The spending review covers government expenditure until 2029‑30 for capital investment.
But van Mierlo claimed that areas like his Oxfordshire constituency are currently below target, and asked if there were any further interventions the government is planning to address this.
"The priority is to continue with the plans as we have today," Baroness Lloyd replied. "Those plans will not meet the target," van Mierlo answered back.
The baroness said the government would need to look at how it can fill any gaps, once it comes to the next period, to which van Mierlo asked about any possible successor program.
"My understanding is that Project Gigabit will continue. What we have sight of is the funding for the next few years," she responded.
There followed a back-and-forth between the two where van Mierlo tried to get an answer for how the shortfall in the government target would be addressed, especially in his constituency, which was halted by the chair asking for a letter from the government outlining its plans for what would happen between 2030, when the funding runs out, and 2032, the target date for delivery.
Later, van Mierlo said only around half the population have taken up full-fiber broadband in areas where it is available. He asked if this was a risk to the government's agenda in terms of growth and other capabilities, and whether there is a need to push adoption further.
Baroness Lloyd said the government's approach was more "showing opportunity and encouraging people, not forcing people to go digital." But this isn't entirely true, since the government wants to [12]switch off the analog phone network .
[13]Whitehall rejects £1.8B digital ID price tag – but won't say what it will cost
[14]UK tech minister vows more whole-government megadeals after £9B Microsoft pact
[15]UK digital ID plan gets a price tag at last – £1.8B
[16]Calls grow for inquiry into UK data watchdog after MoD leak
van Mierlo then turned to a recurring hobby horse for politicians - [17]telephone or utility poles . Some areas are being left out of the network upgrade, he claimed, because residents do not want the infrastructure installed if that means new poles being erected. Is the government doing something to address this?
The baroness informed him that DSIT has "engaged with Ofcom and with the industry on the reuse of existing infrastructure," and hinted that planning-type reforms is one of the "things that we are looking at."
Another committee member, MP Adam Thompson, asked if regulator Ofcom was doing enough to promote competition in the broadband market.
In answer, Baroness Lloyd said the government had "seen the benefits of competition in the broadband market," it wants to build on the progress seen, and has highlighted some of the aspects Ofcom needs to have in mind for the next phase of the broadband rollout.
A stumbling block came when Thompson asked how DSIT intends to measure if competition is working in the UK broadband marketplace.
"Ofcom, in the telecoms access review, decides that," Adams said. "DSIT, in the statement of strategic priorities, sets the strategic framework for Ofcom."
"In that case, does Ofcom have a means by which it can measure that?" Thompson shot back.
"That is probably more a question for Ofcom," Baroness Lloyd responded.
At this point, the chair intervened to note that [18]Ofcom set out three different layers of competition , and Area 2 regions, where there is potential for sustainable competition but it has not yet been realized in 90 percent of the country. She asked whether the minister foresees a point where we will have actual competition somewhere in the country.
"The reason that there are those tiers is in anticipation of there being changes. It allows for the potential that that might happen. I would not want to talk about the time horizon for that or get into the weeds of that," said Baroness Lloyd.
Does this mean the government has no particular ambition for a level of competition across the country? To which the baroness confirmed: "That is correct."
"I do find that surprising, given how important competition is for driving innovation, take-up, consumer choice, et cetera," the chair said. "The government are stepping back from any responsibility or ambition to drive competition across the country?"
"We have an ambition to drive competition, but just like with other areas of competition policy, we do not set specific levels or metrics ourselves," Baroness Lloyd stated.
MP Daniel Zeichner asked about the role of mobile and satellite in achieving the government's vision for UK broadband. In particular, he noted that Starlink has achieved considerable reach, and inquired about the government's investment in OneWeb.
"You are right that we did make a very significant investment in OneWeb," the baroness responded, but added: "I do not feel terribly prepared to answer that question today on our role in OneWeb. I may have to come back to you."
In fact, the UK government sank £500 million (over $600 million) into [19]bailing out OneWeb when Boris Johnson was Prime Minister . The firm later [20]merged with rival Eutelsat , which currently has [21]ambitions to challenge Starlink on satellite broadband delivery. However, the government [22]chose Starlink instead for a trial to serve users in "hard to reach" locations around the country.
The session continued like this until it timed out - a term familiar to many people in locations with crappy network services. ®
Get our [23]Tech Resources
[1] https://committees.parliament.uk/event/25802/formal-meeting-oral-evidence-session/
[2] https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/02/bt_5g_standalone_2030/
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2aUPezigTh0tCvRuoCOHiGwAAAFI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aUPezigTh0tCvRuoCOHiGwAAAFI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aUPezigTh0tCvRuoCOHiGwAAAFI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aUPezigTh0tCvRuoCOHiGwAAAFI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aUPezigTh0tCvRuoCOHiGwAAAFI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2025/07/08/britains_5g_experience_among_the/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2024/06/03/uk_may_not_hit_goal/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2020/03/09/govt_and_carriers_formalise_plans_for_rural_shared_4g_network/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2021/03/19/uk_project_gigabit/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2024/05/21/bt_delays_deadline_for_digital/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2025/12/09/uk_digital_id_costs/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2025/12/08/uk_tech_deals/
[15] https://www.theregister.com/2025/11/28/digital_id_cost/
[16] https://www.theregister.com/2025/11/25/ico_inquiry_afghan_mod/
[17] https://www.theregister.com/2024/09/16/uk_telegraph_poles/
[18] https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/21/ofcom_no_big_changes_to/
[19] https://www.theregister.com/2021/03/25/uk_pm_johnson_relucant_to/
[20] https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/26/eutelsat_oneweb/
[21] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/20/eutelsat_funding/
[22] https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/01/uk_starlink_testing/
[23] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
It would be nice to have 5g
Ochib
But all the local NIMBYs keep objecting to the new masts and then complain online about how bad the mobile phone network is
Phil O'Sophical
What clown appointed "the government minister for digital economy, Baroness Liz Lloyd CBE", whose background is law and history?
Dame Chi Onwurah is an electronics engineer with extensive hardware and software experience. It shows.
Pattern
elsergiovolador
Incompetent minister is a tell tale.
All I know
is 4 years ago I had to provision an office in B1 - central Birmingham,
Our telecoms agent did a teeth suck and said "you can only get 10Mb there". And that needed a cherry picker to sling a cable over the neighbouring building.
I pointed out that my HOME BROADBAND was 100Mb/s - and that was Virgins basic service.
Shrug of shoulders and a accusing finger at the councils lack of planning.
For a city that's always got a road up in the city centre,l it's not a great advert for Birmingham, the West Midlands or the UK.