Ofcom sees no need for overhaul in next phase of fiber rollout despite BT domination
- Reference: 1773752957
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2026/03/17/ofcom_telelcoms_access_review/
- Source link:
Britain's communications regulator today published its [1]Telecoms Access Review for 2026-31 , following on from the [2]last review in 2021 . That put in place a regulatory framework aimed at boosting investment and competition in the wholesale market for consumer broadband services.
The updated document basically tinkers around the edges, tweaking a few things here and there while largely keeping the existing regulations unchanged.
[3]
Ofcom says that it recognizes that BT, the former state-owned telco, still has "significant market power" (SMP) in a number of markets, and so will continue to impose regulations on Openreach, its infrastructure arm, to address its monopoly-like influence.
[4]
[5]
This means keeping rules that require Openreach to let other network firms [6]access its utility poles and underground ducts to deploy new fiber via its Physical Infrastructure Access (PIA) scheme.
Ofcom is also keen to see investment by and competition from alternative network providers (altnets). But it also wants to protect consumers by setting flat, inflation-adjusted prices for a basic superfast broadband product, while allowing flexibility on pricing for other speed bands. This applies to so-called "Area 2" regions, where there is at least one alternative provider to BT, which it reckons now covers 86 percent of UK premises.
[7]
For "Area 3," typically rural locations where there is unlikely to be any other provider, the regulator will let Openreach "recover the reasonable costs of its investments" in rolling out fiber.
In both areas, the price cap on what Openreach can charge retail internet service providers (ISPs) like Vodafone or Sky for using its network is being raised to cover download speeds up to 80 Mbps rather than the 40 Mbps at present. Higher-speed products remain unregulated to incentivize investment in networks that can deliver greater speeds.
Ofcom says that it expects that, by the end of this review period (i.e. 2031), effective competition will exist for wholesale services, and there will be no need to regulate at this point. But recognizing that pigs may also fly, it will continue with the current rules if this doesn't happen.
[8]
If there should be a need to move to cost-based regulation of Openreach in the future, it will ensure that price controls are set at a level that allows BT to earn a return above the cost of its investments.
[9]Scottish broadband service looking a bit dreich, says UK outage study
[10]Ofcom's grumble-o-meter lights up for EE, TalkTalk, Vodafone
[11]UK unveils telecoms charter to curb mid-contract bill shocks
[12]Ofcom probes Meta over WhatsApp info it was legally required to provide
Ofcom is patting itself on the back over what it sees as the success of its existing rules, which it says have aided significant network build-out by Openreach and other companies, and set the country on a course to having widespread availability of gigabit-capable networks.
Since 2021, the number of premises that can access full-fiber broadband has increased from 6.9 million premises (24 percent) to 23.7 million (78 percent) by July 2025, it claims.
But even where full-fiber is available, take-up has only risen to 42 percent of premises, compared to 24 percent in 2021. The regulator concedes that further investment is needed to deliver fiber services to more of the UK, and that competition has not yet developed to the point where it could remove all wholesale regulation.
The UK government previously earmarked £5 billion ($6.7 billion) for the Project Gigabit scheme to subsidize broadband rollout in hard-to-reach areas, and has so far awarded over 30 contracts. Ofcom says that it expects technologies such as fixed wireless access (FWA) and new satellite services to play an increasingly important role here.
FWA typically uses 5G networks, while satellite is available from providers such as Starlink and Brdy, which uses OneWeb.
Openreach rivals appear sanguine about the situation, with a spokesperson for altnet CityFibre telling The Register that "the Telecoms Access Review provides CityFibre with a stable regulatory framework as we scale our network and bring the benefits of genuine infrastructure competition – lower prices, faster speeds and better services – to consumers and businesses nationwide."
"With scaled wholesale competition not yet established in the UK, Ofcom is right to hold its nerve, provide certainty, and avoid a rush to deregulation. It must now remain vigilant and ensure compliance with the rules it has set out," a spokesperson for Virgin Media O2 told us.
On a [13]LinkedIn post , PP Foresight analyst and founder Paolo Pescatore said the move "looks more like evolution than revolution."
"It is sticking with its core strategy: encourage fiber investment, support infrastructure competition and keep Openreach in check where it still holds too much market power. In short, Ofcom believes the approach is working, but competition remains fragile."
"We should still expect some jostling, but attention will turn to how Ofcom applies these rules in practice when future Openreach offers land, and whether altnets can convert network build into sustained take-up fast enough to justify the policy bet," he added.
For its part, Openreach appeared less enthusiastic. In remarks sent to The Register , managing director for Regulatory Affairs Mark Shurmer said: "This is a complex document that we need to review in full. We'll continue to work with Ofcom to make sure the regulation set today will allow fair competition to get the best results for consumers."
"No one is going further or faster than us to build the UK's best network(s). Our investments help customers – and the country – do brilliant things, but they only happen when the environment is stable and supportive. That's why Ofcom's review is critical to the future of digital connectivity across the UK." ®
Get our [14]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.ofcom.org.uk/phones-and-broadband/telecoms-infrastructure/statement-promoting-competition-and-investment-in-fibre-networks-telecoms-access-review-2026-31
[2] https://www.theregister.com/2021/03/18/ofcom_throws_openreach_a_bone/
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/publicsector&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2abmIs7FIoWExEnS4KYMKQAAAARA&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/publicsector&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44abmIs7FIoWExEnS4KYMKQAAAARA&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/publicsector&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33abmIs7FIoWExEnS4KYMKQAAAARA&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2024/09/16/uk_telegraph_poles/
[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/publicsector&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44abmIs7FIoWExEnS4KYMKQAAAARA&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[8] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/publicsector&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33abmIs7FIoWExEnS4KYMKQAAAARA&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2026/03/11/uk_broadband_outage_data/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2026/02/21/ofcom_q3_2025_complaints/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2026/02/12/uk_telco_charter/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2026/01/23/ofcom_probe_whatsapp/
[13] https://www.linkedin.com/posts/paolo-pescatore-867832_ofcoms-telecoms-access-review-is-one-of-activity-7439599732949258240-RlBn
[14] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Its a mess
Who charged them £100 and why do you blame openreach for that?
In all cases where FTTP is not available (even in a fibre priority area) such fees are not charged. You may have to go through some rigmarole of ordering FTTP so that openreach update their records, but if copper is the only option then there's no extra levy for it.
Re: Its a mess
Told me the nearest junction box needed dug up to ensure access as neighbour was being a "see you next Tuesday" about it and claiming they had no right to have it in his garden.
Charge hand even told me that something needed done and the whole lot needed recrimped.
No one ever came
Phoned open reach, no record of call out
They send someone out, who denies it needed recrimped at all.and.claimed neighbour as sweet as could be (BS!!)
Openreach then deny chargehand ever there and they don't employ nor have ever employed anyone with that name (despite him showing id and arriving in openreach uniform and van)
They then tell my ISP that I *have a poisonous grudge and vendetta towards his neighbour and we believe him to be making malicious complaints to weaponise companies in his favour " - I *wish* I had had CCTV cameras in place when chargehand was here.as then I would have sued them for defamation and used the security camera footage as evidence of their malfeasance
Should really have spoken to a lawyer to see whether discovery could have been used to extract internal documents from openreach, along with vehicle tracking data etc....
I'm guessing openreach would (like the NHS) claim it had all been 'accidentally deleted" or "no recordz of this are kept" or "commercially.confidential"
Re: Its a mess
Sounds like this is a "you" problem. You need to go to another provider, who will manage Openreach properly. You shouldn't be dealing with them other than when they turn up. There's no such thing as a £100 "fine" for using FTTC. Doesn't happen.
Re: Its a mess
OpenReach's customers are the ISPs, households have no business relationship with them.
It is your ISP's job to deal with OpenReach.
The horse has bolted
Too late now, but what should have happened in the UK is not the free for all infrastructure overbuild for residential customers where we now have two, three or sometimes more fibre providers in the same streets.
This is inefficient, wasteful and quite frankly bizarre. You don't get this for (fresh and waste) water, gas, electricity or roads. Why should fibre build be different?
What is the result - at the fibre level, low take up rates threaten to make fibre operators unviable. No-one wants to build in marginal areas without subsidy and LEO satellite services and 5G are now realistic alternatives for most.
Service differentiation could easily sit on top of generic (single mode) fibre services.
So, Ofcom as the regulator and policy makers have failed (IMHO) to create and maintain a fibre access market that is attractive, responsive and competitive. Other deployment models could/should have been chosen.
Let the down votes roll in, but this is my somewhat jaded view...
Re: The horse has bolted
Openreach should have been shut down as they are a Bolshy, workshy law unto themselves whose pr statements range from Trumpian bombast to North Korean tantrum throwing.
Where they bulk bought outdated GPON kit and justified it as "standardisation" when rivals were already looking at XGSPON
Where pre alt nets, openreach were claiming fibre would never be viable due to some bs highly inflated installation and rollout figure to "prove" to MPs that the British future law solely in tweaks to the existing tried and trusted copper network, where fibre would be of limited utility and solely for corporate and public sector installations
" Ofcom says that it recognizes that BT, the former state-owned telco, still has "significant market power" (SMP) in a number of markets, and so will continue to impose regulations on Openreach, its infrastructure arm, to address its monopoly-like influence. "
Why? They're clearly not working. Unless, an Openreach with SMP is a benefit to Ofcom...
It's much more convenient for them than having to wrangle 20-30 different companies who may or may not have operations in any given locale. This way, they at least know who they need to pick up the phone to whenever there's any trouble. Assuming they can get a working line installed this month, that is. If only they knew who to talk to about that?
Fiber
Using 'fiber' whilst referencing a UK company is inexcusable.
Re: Fiber
Well it is 60 a lie :)
I think we all want FIBRE
See above.
I have the better version
New build in a village with generally poor internet.
But they put really good fibre in our new estate.
Re: I have the better version
In a similar position here - I have two fibre lines in the downstairs cupboard of my new build house I moved into a month ago now, neither of which are connected to an ONT. Both the Openreach and the Hyperoptic line use Openreach's ducts, and I can't get connected because Openreach haven't signed off on them yet, to which my question was "Well why are there cables in there then?". No answer on that one, but I did find out that there's apparently no capacity for Openreach to connect us at the local exchange, which might explain why Openreach aren't in a hurry to let their competitors get us installed either. Utter law unto themselves.
I have to use a third-party provider (Glide, formerly WarwickNet) since 2019; BT won't even upgrade my cabinet.
I'm now on FTTP with the same provider; however, the price is hefty.
Openreach still gets its budget from BT. It's a bureacratic mess.
Its a mess
OpenReach is a mess. And treats customers with contempt.
This month a client of mine got a FTTC line migrated from one supplier to another. Gets charged a £100 penalty for using copper. Even though the cabinet is about 100 yards away and OpenReach won't run the fibre cable down the alley way. Why are they allowed to charge my client a fee for them being too lazy to do FTTP? As it was, they turned up two days late and never gave an excuse or apology for missing the original install date.
No one seems to be holding them to account any more.