Wednesday, November 30, 2011

Low Bandwidth

Oh dear. Mr Osbourne hasn't just lost his way, he's adopted his predecessor's plans almost down to the last pound.

If you want to take an example of this, he has announced ten 'high speed cities'. In other words pointing out that telcos are going to invest more in certain geographical areas since they are more lucrative.Duh! They were already doing this. Leaving the rest of the country very much in the slow lane and pretending we are a digital economy. We are actually the opposite until the last croft in Scotland has 100Mbps. It is, in reality, a rather trivial and cheap challenge compared to building other types of infrastructure like road.

This is typical of Osbourne, Where he needs a backbone, he falls back on rhetoric and I sense the evil hand of bad advice here.  Osbourne could be a Pitt, as his last budget proved, instead he's an Osbrown: his figures match almost tot he pound Darling's proposed plans for the UK at the last elections down to now having £110bn of spending instead of budget reductions.

As Jeremy Hunt pisses around with his obsession with local TV stations to be controlled by the usual suspects and managed nationally, having great rural broadband would revolutionise our country like nothing else, at a cost that would be a pittance when compared to building a railway between two station these days (and,er, enable new rural content services). He could be our AL Gore/DMA guy. But, no....

Why can't we get to grips with such simple concepts as ultra high speed bandwidth and rural wireless rather than building more roads or houses ?

There is nothing that would return more to the wealth of the country in my view.