The CRTC public hearing on the Obligation to Serve and Universal Service Obligation continues today, with the action taking place in the CRTC’s usual home at the Conference Centre in Gatineau. Last week’s proceedings in Timmins was a northern economic stimulus program with a temporary surge in revenues for the local Walmart, since airlines decided that the witnesses and Commissioners really didn’t need their luggage.
But that is another story, perhaps better suited for a retirement bash (“remember that time we were in Timmins with no change of clothes?”).
The focus in these hearings so far has been on whether to set a national broadband objective – an aspirational target with no teeth – or to expand the current local phone subsidy regime in order to include subsidies for broadband for service in lower density population areas.
This week’s hearing agenda opens with an eclectic mix; witnesses today will include a major ILEC, a group of major cable companies, a group of smaller independent ISPs and a consumer group. The first phase wraps up on Tuesday with appearances by another mix of interests, including the Liberal Industry critic. The rebuttal phase opens on Wednesday.
I wonder if any of the groups will examine the level of broadband adoption in urban areas.
Last week, I wrote about the digital divide that exists between households of varying income.
The emphasis in these CRTC hearings has been on expanding the reach of wireline broadband to the 5% of Canadians in rural and remote regions that lack a terrestrial broadband choice. But, Statistics Canada data shows that there are far more lower income Canadians that have apparently chosen to put food on their table or buy winter boots for their kids, rather than buy a computer and subscribe to broadband. Where is their spokesperson?
The UK announced a plan in January to provide free laptop computers for low income families. I wrote about that kind of idea two years earlier:
Maybe Canada needs to look at targeting broadband subsidies based on income, regardless of where people live. There is a gap in the level of connectedness among lower income Canadians in urban markets as well. Maybe it is time to consider making PCs and broadband part of our social welfare system.
Should we only be looking at rural versus urban subsidy schemes, instead of targeting those who really need help regardless of where they live?