Fixed wireless trade body WISPA (Wireless Internet Service Providers Association) has called on Ofcom to modernise its spectrum auction process.
WISPA argues that Ofcom must update the way it allocates radio spectrum because the current system is outdated and no longer fit for purpose.
Allocation of spectrum has become increasingly contentious as the UK prepares for wider rollouts of 5G and Internet of Things (IoT) services. The choices Ofcom makes now will shape coverage, competition and innovation for years to come.
David Burns, Chairman of UKWISPA, explains the concern:
“An organisation is granted exclusive use of parts of the spectrum for the entire nation, with no obligation to actually use it.
In most cases, such as parts purchased by the big mobile operators, they only ever install transmission equipment where there are large populations – i.e. less than 20% of the land mass.”
UKWISPA highlights several consequences of the current national-allocation model:
-
National licences mean large areas of the UK do not get access to the services operators promise because it is not cost-effective for the licence holder to deploy infrastructure everywhere. Coverage gaps remain familiar: 3G and 4G do not provide consistent service across all locations, and mobile signal dropouts still occur while travelling.
-
When operators concentrate investment in high-population areas, suburban, semi-rural and deep-rural homes and businesses are the most likely to be left behind. This affects television reception, mobile coverage and, crucially, access to fast broadband.
-
Allowing licence holders to use only a fraction of a national resource is inefficient. UKWISPA argues it is unacceptable that parts of the spectrum are effectively unused across large areas. The association compares this to allowing only 20% of roads to be available because a few companies control them, or reserving most NHS beds for private entities—outcomes that would be unthinkable for key public resources.
-
5G and associated technologies will enable new business models and lower-cost, targeted services for enterprises and critical hubs such as hospitals, airports and railway stations. These benefits will be harder to realise under the legacy national approach to spectrum allocation.
Pressure for reform has come from other industry players as well. Hutchison-owned mobile network Three launched the #MakeTheAirFair campaign, calling on Ofcom to cap any single operator’s spectrum holdings at 30 percent. Three’s campaign, featuring a public appeal and a stylised portrayal of Ofcom leadership, attracted more than 170,000 supporters but did not secure the policy change it sought.
Rather than forcing existing large holders to divest spectrum, Ofcom opted in a recent decision to prevent BT/EE—which controls about 45 percent of immediately usable UK mobile spectrum—from bidding for additional 4G spectrum. That choice stopped short of requiring BT/EE to sell any of its current allocations.
UKWISPA and other advocates are urging Ofcom to consider alternative allocation methods, such as regional licences, usage obligations, spectrum sharing frameworks, or caps on national holdings, to ensure spectrum is used efficiently and delivers widespread social and economic benefits.
Reforming spectrum auctions could help increase competition, accelerate rural and targeted deployments, and unlock innovative services across the UK. The debate continues over how best to balance investment incentives for large operators with broader public interest goals for connectivity and digital inclusion.
Do you agree with UKWISPA’s call for Ofcom to modernise spectrum auctions? Let us know in the comments.