I think we missed the point
I [i]beleive[/i] BT's real end game is not the USO requirement to provide POTS, but a requirement to provide POTS service to [i]every household[/i].
The difference is subtle, but has major cost benefits for BT: it is cheaper to provide several dozen 'lines' (POST, fibre, etc) in a town than it is to provide a single POTS line for a rural user. Removal of the obligation to do just this would allow BT to cherry pick the market. This should never, ever be allowed. At the moment we have a [growing] 'digital divide' in the UK; removing the basic right to telephone service would result in a communications divide.
I see the logic in BT wanting to move to a wholly IP based solution (and under 21CN they did migrate most of their network to IP). And whilst the arguments for doing so from a consumer perspective are correct (we all use DECT handsets, VOIP works, power failures are rare etc), lets not forget that a similar argument was made when considering the number of lifeboats the Titanic should have, 'because, after all, the ship is unsinkable anyway'...
Just because 'it' [power outages are rare/fibre-broadband is available/mobile coverage] is fine where "you" live, that is not the case country-wide, and it is OFCOMs duty to consider the entire country, not just the areas where 'it' is fine and bugger the rest.
As many have said, if the obligation was to ensure that handset/basestation came with battery-backed power, that would be a start. However, lets not forget that the USO is beyond the provisions of POTS, but is the universal provisions of [i]service[/i]
Biting the hand that feeds IT
