Broadband for large groups — Do centralised contracts work?

Back in September, the Independent Parliamentary Standard Authority (IPSA) which regulates and manages the business costs of the 650 or so Members of Parliament, announced a public procurement for a broadband service/broker to manage the broadband services and ‘IPSA-funded living accommodation’:

“IPSA would like to put in place a contract to provide high-quality reliable broadband services across the United Kingdom to MPs’ constituency offices and IPSA-funded living accommodation.

The contract should allow for the one stop shop for the MP to provision broadband services through a broadband broker/provider and associated services.

We would like to centralise billing removing the burden from MPs entirely and reducing the work of IPSA’s finance team by processing a single itemised bill each month.”

IPSA Procurement Document

The idea is that MPs wouldn’t need to contract directly with a broadband provider, and could also avoid the need to separately pay for services for their constituency offices (then claim them from expenses). We presume this would include any second homes due to the need for MPs to work in London but have a base in their constituency.

In this case the contract is estimated to be worth £3 million (or £3.5m including VAT) for the period from 1 April 2026 to 31 December 2029 so 3 years 9 months, with a potential extension of a further 12 months. This amounts to about £102+VAT per MP per month, so we presume two locations per MP.

This makes a lot of sense on the face of it. In the same way, many corporates with many stores will often use companies with centralised contracts to source broadband connections.

The document makes it clear they want a one-stop-shop but that they will work through a broadband “broker/provider” implying this isn’t necessarily a single provider, so there is scope for this contract to provide services across multiple networks. It’s unclear what they define in terms of characteristics, however we would be worried if they grant the entire contract to someone who only sells Openreach services as this would be a significant mistake.

We often get asked for recommendations on broadband provider and our answer is always quite nuanced. Even considering different use cases, there’s so many answers which vary by location.

Let’s pick an example: You’re in a block of flats which has Hyperoptic (full fibre), Virgin Media (cable) and Openreach-based FTTC services available. Ignoring bundling with TV services, costs/promotions (which may vary depending on location), in most cases Hyperoptic is likely to be the best option. As they don’t wholesale services, you couldn’t buy the service from say a Zen Internet who aggregate many altnets.

If you have a central contract for mobile phones with say Vodafone, this may be great but if your home has no coverage and only EE is available, a Vodafone work phone simply won’t cut it for much of the time (ignoring for this purpose the possibility of using your broadband and Wi-FI calling).

The best option for everyone isn’t always possible to aggregate with large scale contracts, and this example illustrates that there is no single provider who is going to be able to deliver the best service. There will be some areas where there’s an altnet with full fibre services, and nothing but slow FTTC services, which may make the choice even clearer, and it could be a quite obscure altnet too most people have never heard of.

There’s some benefit in aggregating demand, but anyone considering buying services this way should provide for exceptions for those who wish to use another provider. (We’re not sure if this is or isn’t being provided for by IPSA here so this isn’t intended as criticism, but we wanted to highlight the nuances behind choosing a broadband provider).

Find Hyperoptic broadband deals here.