Does geography determine needs?

In my post on Wednesday, I raised the question of whether it is appropriate to continue the system of subsidizing telecommunications services based on the cost of providing service to certain geographies.

rural and remote does not equate to low-income; often, there are substantial savings in housing costs that can offset higher prices for other services. Similarly, lower cost areas may still have prices for services that exceed the affordability level for some households.

When telecom services are usually a fraction of housing costs, why are we so focussed on subsidizing everyone in a certain geographic area to offer discounts of a few dollars per month. If we are so concerned with broadband affordability, shouldn’t the subsidy be needs based independent of where the person lives? Shouldn’t low income families in an urban setting be more deserving of help paying the bill than someone who can afford the upkeep on an estate in the country?

Two years ago, in our opening remarks at The 2008 Canadian Telecom Summit, we called for a needs based subsidy program to enable affordability, regardless of where people live. Such as system would be competitively neutral and would focus on demand, rather than supply.

Isn’t it time to try a new approach?

3 thoughts on “Does geography determine needs?”

  1. Having lived in a rural area for four years now, we see many people that cannot afford to pay the higher costs for the limited alternative broadband services. In addition, many are also faced with much higher transportation costs, higher food and heating costs, and receive lower levels of municipal services.

    I do agree with your comments that subsidies should not be geographical based, but rather by need, and have suggested for many years that could be a service managed by social services, perhaps like telephone ‘coupons’ like food coupons used to be delivered.

  2. I live only 30minutes outside Winnipeg and even that is too far away for these companies to care. Internet & Cellular providers just don’t want to expand anywhere outside the main cities of each province.

    You’d think with Wind Mobile and Public Mobile now coming into the business that all the companies would be racing to cover the country and get a larger customer base before it’s too late. Instead these companies seem content with their infrastructure and only care about changing the prices.

  3. Mike: agree with your coments….don’t understand why the carriers only think of city subscribers who already have of choices, as compard to those of us who are in non-urban centres…many of our friends/clients would pay a slight premium to have high speed and reliable wireless suppliers.

    perhaps if more of as non-urban Canadians expressed our voice to Canadian government and providers, they would react and think about providing us with service. Fortunatel for me and my team, even though we are in a rural area, we are well served with reliable DSL wired, and wireless EVDO and satellite high speed providers.
    Roberta Fox, FOX GROUP

Comments are closed.

Scroll to Top