A few weeks ago, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities used the final day of The 2008 Canadian Telecom Summit to release a report called “Highway Robbery: How Federal Telecom Rules Cost Taxpayers and Damage Public Roads” [download full report here].
The report claims that the CRTC deprives local governments the power to recover their costs from companies that tear up roads for their telecom networks, shorting municipal governments about $100M per year in road repairs.
The report and one of the backgrounders takes a cheap shot at the CRTC, blaming staff and commissioners for an insensitivity to municipal issues because of their backgrounds:
Given the technical knowledge and expertise required to fulfill its core mandate, many present and past CRTC members have been drawn from the Canadian telecommunications industry. Former telecommunications business executives, industry lawyers, engineers, and venture capital financiers all bring their perspective to the issues. Looking inside the Commission, one finds a comparable set of skills among the CRTC’s staff.
While such appointments ensure that telecommunications carriers will be well understood when appearing before the Commission, the scenario is quite different when an entity from outside the industry, such as a municipality, appears to defend its interests in this specialized industry forum.
We used to hear the complaints from city councils about the traffic tie-ups due to fibre construction crews working downtown. I found that movie crews tended to close more lanes, but we didn’t cry about that because films are more glamourous and perhaps the economic benefits were more visible.
The CRTC recognized those economic benefits in its Decision 2001-23:
The benefits of a competitive telecommunications market and greater access to modern high-speed networks… provide generalized benefits throughout the municipality, attracting industry, creating jobs [and] increasing tax revenue.
FCM fought and lost in front of the CRTC and it has lost judicial appeals of this decision.
Maybe it is time to move on.
For a couple years now [see here and here], I have been challenging municipalities to actively promote positions that promote a friendly approach to investment in telecom infrastructure.
Which communities will be first to recognize the economic benefits to cooperatively building advanced infrastructure?