Ofcom chair Sir Ian Cheshire has launched a wide-ranging review of the regulator’s structure, resources, and operating model as it assumes a substantially larger role overseeing online platforms.
The review is expected to conclude in early autumn and will examine whether Ofcom is organised to enforce the Online Safety Act while retaining its established responsibilities across telecommunications, broadcasting, spectrum, postal services, and competition.
Cheshire has said the regulator’s workload has nearly doubled following the addition of online-safety responsibilities. He indicated that further resources were likely to be required, although he did not envisage an uncontrolled increase in staffing or expenditure.
Ofcom is funded principally through fees paid by the industries it regulates rather than general taxation. An increase in its budget can therefore have direct cost implications for communications providers and online services within its remit.
The regulator was established more than two decades ago around media and telecommunications markets. Its responsibilities have since expanded to include online video, digital platforms, illegal and harmful content, child-safety requirements, and scrutiny of technology companies operating at global scale.
Cheshire joined the Ofcom board on 9 June for a four-year term. His previous executive career included leading Kingfisher and B&Q, while his chairmanships have included Channel 4, Barclays UK, Landsec, and Spire Healthcare.
The review follows criticism from several directions. Online-safety campaigners have argued that enforcement has been too cautious or slow, while technology companies and some overseas politicians have challenged the scope of UK rules and their potential effect on freedom of expression.
Ofcom must translate broad statutory duties into codes, risk assessments, information requests, investigations, and penalties. That requires legal, technical, economic, and enforcement expertise across a rapidly changing group of products and business models.
The pace of artificial intelligence development adds to the difficulty. New applications can reach large numbers of users before regulators have gathered sufficient evidence to assess risks, while generative systems create and distribute content differently from conventional social networks.
Regulatory effectiveness therefore depends partly on speed. A process designed for comparatively stable telecommunications markets may not respond quickly enough to services that change features, algorithms, and user behaviour within weeks.
Greater agility must still be balanced with due process. Ofcom’s decisions can impose substantial costs, affect access to services, and raise questions involving privacy, competition, security, and speech. Companies require predictable standards and a fair opportunity to challenge findings.
The review may consider whether responsibilities should be organised around sectors, risks, or regulatory functions. It could also examine how data, technology, legal teams, and enforcement staff work together when an issue crosses traditional departmental boundaries.
Ofcom’s expanded remit creates overlap with other regulators. The Information Commissioner’s Office oversees data protection, the Competition and Markets Authority holds powers over digital markets, and financial and advertising regulators govern specific forms of online activity.
Clear coordination is important for companies subject to several regimes at once. Duplicated information requests, inconsistent timetables, and overlapping remedies can increase compliance costs without necessarily improving outcomes.
Businesses outside the largest technology groups are also affected. Online marketplaces, search services, gaming platforms, messaging applications, hosting providers, and other intermediaries can fall within the framework depending on their functions and user risks.
Smaller companies may face proportionately higher compliance costs because they lack the legal, policy, and engineering teams available to global platforms. Ofcom must therefore apply risk-based regulation without creating loopholes for rapidly growing services.
The regulator’s wider remit encompasses communications services, competition, investment, innovation, consumer protection, and online safety. The review must determine how those objectives can be delivered without fragmenting accountability or weakening established functions.
Cheshire has indicated that Ofcom may seek additional powers where existing legislation proves insufficient. Any expansion would require political consideration and would renew debate over how far a communications regulator should intervene in platform design and content governance.
The autumn findings will establish whether Ofcom intends to reorganise, increase industry-funded resources, or request legislative change. The review begins from the recognition that an institution created for broadcasting and telecoms is now expected to oversee some of the most complex digital services used in the UK.
You must be logged in to post a comment.