Rural Mobile Connectivity Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateEdward Leigh
Main Page: Edward Leigh (Conservative - Gainsborough)Department Debates - View all Edward Leigh's debates with the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology
(3 days, 21 hours ago)
Commons ChamberMy right hon. Friend makes a good point about the use of public money and how we develop infrastructure fit for the modern age as part of a public and private operation.
Rural roaming measures have been opposed by the industry, but they were recommended by the Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs in its 2019 report. I am convinced that if the Government are serious about enabling economic growth in rural areas, they should explore that option. My constituent Rob Paul, a consultant with vast experience of rural telecoms projects, suggests that robustly enforced financial penalties are the only thing that operators will respond to. After years of being let down, I cannot disagree.
I turn to the digital switchover. Mobile phones have been cited as the default back-up option in a power cut once the copper landline network is switched off, as has now happened over most of the UK. That is hugely concerning for people in areas prone to extensive power cuts in winter storms. As we are rural, our power is not put back online as a priority. Back-up batteries for routers will last for a couple of hours—perhaps up to 12. People in remote parts of North Shropshire are sometimes left without power for several days. Someone who is at home on their own, in the dark and frightened, might want to call someone other than the emergency services in the event of a power cut. It is crucial that people can access their mobile phone and get a reliable signal when the power is down, whoever they are.
One 90-year-old constituent told me that she purchased a phone because she was concerned about the digital switchover and wanted to ensure that she could still make calls in the event of a power cut. The mobile connection in her village of Knockin is so bad that she was never once able to use the phone. When she asked EE to end the contract, it required £293 to release her.
It is not just about power cuts. Hundreds of people in Kinnerley and Ellesmere have been left without any service at all when their broadband cabinet has been taken out by other factors such as fire or car accidents. Peter, who lives near Whittington, has terminal lung disease. Last weekend, his internet went down for 12 hours, which also meant that his landline was down. There was no mobile signal at his home. If Peter had had an emergency, he would have had no one to turn to.
Improving rural phone signal would not just help vulnerable individuals. It would help local businesses, grow the economy and help our health and social care system. Smartphones are an essential part of daily modern life, whether that is for a GP patient who needs to book an appointment or request a repeat prescription or for a small business owner who needs to take payment from a customer. I have spoken to countless elderly people who struggle to access key services. I have heard from farmers, landscape gardeners, taxi drivers and dog groomers whose businesses all suffer because of signal problems. One livestock and arable farmer told me:
“I cannot express strongly enough how frustrating it is farming in the modern world. It is depressing the amount of time wasted walking around the yard trying to get a slight signal to answer the phone”.
Someone who gets injured may have no way of contacting the emergency services or seeking other help. Vast sums have to be spent on helping tractor GPS systems to navigate the inconsistent signal.
I congratulate the hon. Lady on securing this important debate. I represent a rural area like hers—mine is in Lincolnshire—and in some Wold villages it is appalling: there is no mobile connection. All the red telephone boxes are being closed, and it is a tremendous struggle to persuade BT to keep them open. I wonder whether we could do more work with councils such as West Lindsey on the voucher scheme and Project Gigabit to get to the last hard-to-reach areas. Through this debate, can we encourage the Government to put resources into helping district councils such as West Lindsey?
The right hon. Gentleman makes a good point. I will mention Project Gigabit and its shortcomings, but we could have a three-hour debate on the subject. I wholly agree that we cannot consider mobile coverage and broadband separately. They are two parts of the same thing: the areas with the worst broadband signal tend to have the worst mobile signal. It is a very difficult problem to resolve.
As I was saying, modern farming requires modern technology, but if the signal is inadequate it does not work. Being able to rely on broadband would also help those who work in an office, but just 50% of rural commercial buildings in North Shropshire have access to full fibre. The announcement of Project Gigabit gave us real hope, but after two years, the contract was handed back having connected just 3,500 of the planned 12,000 properties. The word I would use to describe Project Gigabit is “shambles”, as my adjectives of choice are unsuitable for the Chamber. We are still waiting for details of when the rest of the properties will be delivered, but meanwhile we continue to pay exorbitant prices for mediocre broadband because Openreach and other companies neglect to invest in our area. Across the House, Members are calling for a change in direction for rural digital infrastructure.
I am conscious of time so I will speed up slightly. Essentially, gaps in mobile and broadband coverage threaten to undermine national ambitions. My report from the APPG on digital communities highlights how co-ordinated action to address the challenges and unlock the full potential of the UK’s digital infrastructure is crucial for rural areas and for growth in the rest of the UK as well. Successive Governments have failed to grasp that. We can just look at the emergency services network, which should have been introduced in 2017. Nearly a decade on, we are still waiting for it to be properly rolled out.
The Government’s ambition is to have high-quality 5G in all populated areas by 2030, yet we rank 30th among 39 developed economies according to the Social Market Foundation. We know that we are lagging miles behind and we are still trying to make up the ground. In Shropshire, we would be grateful for consistent 4G. People who live in rural areas pay the same, or even higher, fees as people in towns in return for a second-rate service. We must be given the connections that we need to reliably access modern life.
Successive Governments have treated rural areas with disdain, telling us that everything is great when we can see for ourselves that it is not. It would bring far more money into the Treasury and unlock the huge potential of the rural economy if the Government finally saw sense. I hope that the Minister will address the abject failure of the shared rural network and Gigabit projects, and outline a sensible strategy for delivering rural infrastructure in future.