Better an active broadband policy than a white Christmas

Broadband Digital infrastructure Digital services Digitization Competition

Yesterday, our Association Director Anne-Marie Fransson wrote in Dagens samhälle that municipalities are making broadband expansion more expensive and delaying it by not promoting effective competition. The article is based on the fact that we and our member companies have seen a very worrying trend in recent years where municipality after municipality acts contrary to both the government's broadband strategy and the Swedish Competition Authority, PTS and SKL's joint Principles for municipal broadband initiatives.

With only four years to go until 2020 - the year when 90% of all households and businesses should have access to at least 100Mbit/s according to the government's target - we feel compelled to draw attention to the problem. If the target is to be achieved and the rollout is to be implemented in all parts of the country, Sweden's municipalities must have municipal broadband strategies and promote effective competition. There should really be no doubt about this. It is no news that effective competition is the primary means of ensuring a choice of high-quality and affordable services for Sweden's consumers, businesses and authorities, and thus the single most important tool for achieving the broadband targets. In the Government's broadband strategy from 2009, effective competition is a priority area of action, and in the same document the Government is clear that the most important means of achieving an effective market is effective competition between market players.

In December 2010, the Broadband Forum's second working group, the Obstacles Group, concluded that one of the most significant and prioritized obstacles to be removed in order to achieve the government's broadband goals was "municipal actions that counteract competition, supply and infrastructure development".

A year later, in December 2011, the Broadband Forum's third working group, the Solutions Group, concluded that "The state has an important role in coordinating all public activities in line with the government's broadband strategy and its objectives" and that "The municipalities and county/regional councils have an important role in creating the conditions for effective competition, applying non-discriminatory conditions and promoting the expansion of and access to broadband in both urban and rural areas, including through land access on reasonable terms".

In between, in 2010, PTS, the Swedish Competition Authority and SKL were also very clear in their joint publication: Common principles for municipal broadband initiatives, where they agreed that:

  • "Municipalities should promote good competition in all areas, including broadband, and seek good dialog with the private sector on competition issues."
  • "Municipalities should avoid monopolization of the infrastructure, for example by avoiding so-called exclusivity agreements regardless of whether contracts are signed with a private or public operator."
  • "Municipalities should promote parallel fiber deployment where possible and appropriate."
  • "When signing contracts and in verbal agreements, municipalities must give private and public operators the same terms and conditions unless there are objective reasons for offering different terms and conditions."

Many municipalities have taken on board and are acting fully in line with these letters, and residents there are to be congratulated. Unfortunately, this is far from being the case. At the same time, more and more municipalities are acting in the opposite direction. Why is that, and why is no one saying stop? What are the strategies and guidelines of the government and our authorities really worth?

While broadband deployment is progressing, there is no doubt that market investment could go so much further and so many more people could be connected to the future-proof digital infrastructure and have access to high-quality and affordable services in so much less time, if the above strategy and principles were more widely followed.

At Christmas time, many people write wish lists. I know that in many parts of our country there are local residents who want a good, affordable and future-proof digital connection. A Christmas present that is already a given for many of us, but far from everyone. In order for all those who still have this on their wish list not to have to wait even longer than Christmas 2020, the government must now seriously pursue an active broadband policy to ensure that the broadband strategy is followed in all parts of the country, and that municipal politicians understand the importance of healthy competition. I wish for that, even more than a white Christmas.