Is the UK Online initiative in danger of stumbling before
it's even left the ground? Simon Moores seems to think so, given no
one seems to know where the long-term funding is coming
from.
Almost three years ago, I wrote a feature for The
Observer, called ‘Welcome to the aftermath of the old economy’, and
in it I asked if it was possible to solve the challenge of the
so-called "digital divide" in the time the government imagined was
possible.
Since then, of course, we’ve witnessed some remarkable changes.
My local post office in London is crammed wall to wall with young
South Africans picking up their Hotmail, but the one in my home
town in Kent still hasn’t a PC in sight, although its Iraqi
population has swollen significantly over the past 12 months.
Broadband here is no closer than Baghdad which, last week,
opened its first internet café, ahead of BT, which promises to
upgrade the local exchange once the weapons inspectors have left
this quiet seaside town.
But we have to start somewhere, and our government generously
funded the expansion of 6,000 UK Online Centres in an effort to
guarantee internet access for the 50 million or so people who can’t
find it elsewhere.
Funding these centres has cost £370m to date and, since the
prime minister enthused about the programme at the eSummit in
November, I’ve been wondering how long government could afford to
dig deep. After all, PCs in a public access environment aren’t
likely to last long, so what happens when the next technology refit
is demanded in 18 months' time?
It appears that the National Audit Office (NAO) has been asking
the same questions and The New Opportunities Fund (NOF) has stated
that "lottery money is unlikely to be a source of future revenue
funding for UK Online centres, as this money is intended to be used
for specific, one-off, interventions that are time-limited".
In fact, the report by the NAO states, "Moreover, some of those
centres most placed to reach disadvantaged target groups are likely
to be least able to find funds from elsewhere." It continues: "If
UK Online centres are forced to close, it is not clear whether
there will be sufficient resources available to set up a
replacement in the vicinity."
Not only is the programme expensive but there’s very limited
information on who is actually using the services provided, which
leaves us with 6,000, very expensive UK Online centres to be
maintained and a digital deficit of around 40 million citizens. A
gap which is unlikely to be closed without, in my estimation,
another £500m being injected over the next five years.
There is, I suspect, very little hope of government being able
to find this kind of money without the rest of us feeling more pain
from higher taxes, so it rather begs the question, is the UK Online
initiative sustainable within some kind of public-private sector
partnership?
In the cities and larger towns, where businesses are more likely
to afford some kind of sponsorship, then maybe. But in those areas
where the UK Online concept is most needed, it may, as the NAO
fears, risk becoming like other, more essential services, a brand
more characterised by its absence than its evidence and a monument
to the indivisibility of the so-called digital divide.
What do you think?
Is UK Online doomed to
failure?
Tell us in an e-mail >> CW360.com
reserves the right to edit and publish answers on the Web site.
Please state if your answer is not for
publication.
ZentelligenceSetting the world to rights with the collected thoughts and
opinions of the futurist writer, broadcaster and Computer Weekly
columnist Simon Moores.