“I think if we want better quality networks in more places, then there has to be a conversation about consumers needing to pay more,” says Matthew Howett, at Assembly Research.

“We’ve seen the effect of low prices in the lived experience of coverage for many people today.”

Howett draws a comparison with airline customers willing to fork out for a business class ticket. “At the moment, mobile operators are only allowing you to choose a higher baggage allowance,” he adds.

Research commissioned by European telecom operators has found that the EU’s Cybersecurity Act 2 revamp could make the bloc less resilient, not more. The paper represents a new line of attack from an industry dead-set against the proposal. By forcing telecom operators to kick out risky suppliers — including the likes of Huawei — the European Commission is contradicting its own aim of a diverse supply chain, researchers from Assembly said in a report commissioned by trade body Connect Europe. That would mean “replacing one dependency with another.”

Not only would it mean a less resilient network; the rip-and-replace would also increase costs as there would be less competition and would leave less cash for telcos to build out 5G and fibre networks, Assembly said.

Connect Europe and fellow telco trade body GSMA wrote to Commission President Ursula von der Leyen earlier this year warning that networks will fall over if operators are forced to rip out Chinese equipment.

Eagle-eyed readers may notice that telecom operators are lining up against the prospect of reduced competition among their suppliers but have no issue pushing hard for consolidation in their own industry. James Robinson, a senior analyst at Assembly and one of the report’s authors, said in an interview that the comparison is too simplistic and not “apples for apples.”

The report also reiterates one of the industry’s main arguments, that the three-year timeline for kicking out Huawei et al is too short. Thirty-six months is “really not a long time when it comes to the kind of nature and scale and cost of the operation,” Robinson said. Seven to 10 years is more realistic, the report argued.

Telecom operators shouldn’t have been surprised by the proposal. Its precursor, the 5G toolbox, came out in early 2020, and the United States has taken a hard stance on Huawei. While it’s true that such a move was “signposted,” operators were nonetheless taken aback by the “severity [and] complexity” of the proposal, Robinson said.

Bart Smallman, analyst at Assembly Research, said establishing “strong 5G coverage on the Tube network” had “taken longer than it should have”, but that its imminent completion was a “positive step”. “

Now it is important for the government and industry to turn their attention to improving wider 5G coverage,” he added.

“Turning around BT is like turning around a juggernaut, it’s got to be done very slowly and [with] careful manoeuvres — you can’t do it overnight,” said Matthew Howett, founder of telecoms and tech research firm Assembly Research. 

“But with the changes made, it’s now pointing in the right direction.”

Between 2020 and 2025, the price of an average-use basket of mobile services in the UK fell by 20 per cent in real terms, despite average data use more than doubling, the regulator Ofcom said.

Low prices had “had a real and lasting impact on operators’ ability to invest in rolling out networks”, said Matt Howett, founder of Assembly Research.

“Openreach is the perennial question,” says Matthew Howett, chief executive of Assembly Research. “Looking at the future, the big one is realising the value of the constituent parts of BT. The wider group does not reflect the value of its constituents. Openreach is now probably the most valuable component of that, particularly when the fibre build is complete. How will she realise that?”

Bart Smallman, from independent policy research company Assembly Research, said: ‘Arcep updated its mobile coverage maps to show daily updates about unavailable masts that are damaged or under maintenance.’ He believes real-world testing can better align consumers’ experiences of mobile coverage with what’s reported by operators and regulators.

But regardless of what happens, the infrastructure that has been built will remain. Fibre lasts for 100 years, meaning it will remain in use for generations. Without the “altnets”, the UK would likely have worse broadband technology, with consumers paying more for the privilege. For the regulator Ofcom that should be seen as a win.

“Rightly, Ofcom’s priority has always been on delivering effective, long-term competition,” says James Robinson, senior analyst at Assembly Research. He adds the regulator knows that some altnets will not survive on a standalone basis, but “its role is to provide a reasonable shot at success, not to artificially sustain certain operators”.