Bloc: Balkanizing telecom regulation

HansardIt is a sport in Canada to poke at the CRTC. As much as telecom insiders and the public alike enjoy griping about the telecom and broadcast regulatory authority, there is almost unanimous agreement that Canadians are better off with a single national regulatory authority, as contrasted with having to deal with 50 state Public Utility Commissions on top of the FCC in the US.

Michael Geist points out an interesting exchange in the House of Commons from Thursday. It seems that someone at the Bloc Quebecois remembered that the current Minister of Transport, Lawrence Cannon, was Quebec’s Minister of Communications in a previous life, and realized that he may have said things in the past that could come back to haunt him. The exchange included many familiar faces including former CRTC Commissioner (the current Heritage Minister) Bev Oda.

Here are some excerpts from the Hansard:

Since the government is no longer interested in regulating telecommunications, why does it not just transfer its telecommunications authority to the Government of Quebec?

Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ)

Mr. Speaker, this government will continue to act responsibly towards all industrial sectors, including telecommunications. This government already has a good economic record and will continue to work with the telecommunications industry so that, like all industries, it benefits from that record.
Mr. Jason Kenney (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, CPC)

Mr. Speaker, that does not answer the question raised.

I would like to quote from a document of the Quebec communications department, when the current federal Minister of Transport served as its minister.
“Quebec must be able to establish the rules for operating radio and television systems, and control development plans for telecommunications networks, service rates and the regulation of new telecommunications services.”
Will the government follow the advice of its Minister of Transport and transfer telecommunications and broadcasting responsibilities? This could be done through an administrative agreement, for example.

Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ)

Mr. Speaker, I believe that the Leader of the Bloc Québécois should also add that the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in this regard with the Guèvremont decision, which confirmed federal authority over communications.

Hon. Lawrence Cannon (Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, CPC)
* * *

Mr. Speaker, let us come back to the former communications minister in Quebec and current Minister of Transport who wrote in a discussion paper on telecommunications that Quebec should have full jurisdiction and use a single regulatory body.

People who once made such remarks ought to believe in what they said for the rest of their life.

In light of the fact that his colleague at Industry asked the CRTC to regulate telecommunications as little as possible, does the Minister of Transport intend to press him to have the responsibility for telecommunication regulations in Quebec delegated to the Government of Quebec?

Mr. Paul Crête (Montmagny—L’Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, BQ)

Mr. Speaker, as everyone knows, today’s communications world is not only provincial, it is national, international and global. That is why we believe it is in the interests of Canada to have one unified voice for Canada while respecting and acknowledging the special needs of every region and province in this country.
Hon. Bev Oda (Minister of Canadian Heritage and Status of Women, CPC)

I don’t think the Industry Minister’s intent is to lessen telecom regulation by relegating (Balkanizing?) federal authority to the provinces.

Technorati Tags:

Does the internet suck?

I think the cover story of this week’s Maclean’s magazine, with an attention grabbing headline like “The Internet Sucks“, is good reading. Before you start thinking that Maclean’s must be one of those typical old-economy, main stream media dinosaurs, remember that Maclean’s is part of Rogers Publishing, owned by the same folks who bring you, ummm…, the internet on cable.

The magazine and author have been vilified in many blogs for taking a contrarian view. Of course, the majority of people who blog have a somewhat religious fervour toward all that is e-nabled or i-nterconnected.

I wanted to wait until I actually read the story by Steve Maich before commenting on it. Many bloggers couldn’t be bothered to go to the source material, because that would have meant paying for the print edition. [It is now available on-line.]

One of my first observations is that the inflamatory nature of the promotional headline (“The Internet Sucks”) and the Maclean’s press release succeeded in: a) attracting lots of attention; and, b) proving some of the positions advanced by the author.

A point from the article:

In a 2001 paper, Cass Sunstein, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School, described the “echo chamber” effect of blogs and message boards. Rather than fostering debate, moderation and common understanding, he argued, these sites have contributed to the polarization of our political culture. People gravitate toward sites that reflect their established point of view, and once comfortably ensconced in their political echo chamber, the participants take turns preaching to the assembled choir, reinforcing each other’s ideas and biases, and denouncing anyone who might disagree.

Rather than promoting open discussion and greater understanding, the Net has fed the cynical perception that every form of traditional authority is based on lies and corruption. The much-hyped free market of ideas is a world in which the loudest and most outrageous assertion dominates the discussion. Everybody believes they are being oppressed by those opposed to them. The truth is what you already think it is, and nobody can be trusted.

Blogs citing blogs. Rankings based on counting links to a blog. Can we value user rankings such as Digg? Is it sufficient for news to be popular? Are we sacrificing accuracy and quality of the written word?

Articles attract a good ranking because of an alignment of a story with what people want to hear or hear about. In a Digg-ranked world, ice cream shops might only carry 3 or 4 flavours. Those 3-4 flavours may not include vanilla or chocolate, because in a Digg-ranked world, traditional is often evil – and we seem to ignore the unwashed masses. Allow me to put in a good word for Muskoka Maple Moosetracks.

Hyperbolic headline aside, the Maclean’s cover story is worthwhile reading, and fodder for discussion over the weekend. What are the greatest achievements delivered by the internet? Not just the web and new media. I’d like to hear your views.

But read the whole article first. Maybe even pay for the magazine, even if that means supporting MSM’s tired old business model.

Author Steve Maich defends his honour at Mark Evans‘s blog. Read the pieces by Steve & Mark and be sure to look at the comments as well. It seems to me that if blogs on the Internet provide a Speaker’s Corner, the audience seems quick to throw eggs at speakers that don’t conform with a non-conformist agenda.

The missing link for Newfoundland

According to a CP newswire story, the Newfoundland government is looking at participating in a consortium deal to build a second fibre link to the mainland. The group would be made up of Rogers, Persona and MTS Allstream.

Newfoundland needs an additional link, as last weekend’s telecom crisis demonstrated, but government money isn’t the way to build it. Instead, the government should exert its influence to ensure the consortium includes Bell Aliant, the operators of the current link. At the very least, it should be a condition of using the government cash.

Aliant should provide capacity on their existing ring in exchange for the same on the new facility. But why would they do that? After all, Aliant already operates a survivable ring, according to documents they filed with the CRTC in 2004. It wasn’t the transmission ring to the mainland that knocked Newfoundland off-the-air last week. Why should Aliant help its competitors?

The alternative is that the government might consider operating its own network. Worse still would be the federal and provincial governments both dropping off the current Aliant network and no longer being the biggest customers for Aliant’s capacity or even acting as customers for the new consortium. What good is having your own fibre if you lose your biggest customers, including the capacity currently being sold to the consortium members.

Trade capacity in order to keep the public sector out of operating its own network. That is how consumers of all 4 carriers benefit – lower costs and improved reliability.

Nortel targets municipal WiFi

In early September, we wrote about the challenges for Nortel as it looks at business units in which to invest resources for the future.

Nortel has announced that municipal WiFi will be one of those areas. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina has been selected as the home of Nortel’s municipal WiFi laboratory.

The lab focuses on research and development of broadband wireless solutions that will allow municipalities and operators to realize simplified introduction of new wireless services and applications to boost economic development, improve public safety and give citizens easier access to government services. The lab also gives Nortel a collaborative environment in which to fully test and integrate an expansive ecosystem of partners to provide municipal applications.

I can’t help but wonder if Toronto Hydro’s selection of technology from Siemens and BelAir Networks may have cost Canada the opportunity to host Nortel’s investment that favours the establishment of the lab in RTP. Will Nortel’s opportunities for municipal WiFi deployments be given a boost by its Government Solutions division (formerly PEC Solutions)?

More on Nortel’s WiFi plans is at Mark Evan’s All Nortel blog.

Local competition accelerating

CRTCAs part of Public Notice 2006-12, the process to review the Local Forbearance decision, the CRTC gathered local telecom market statistics from the various industry participants.

Last Friday, the Commission published aggregated statistics for residential service. The data shows industry-wide figures for year-end 2004, 2005 and the first 8 months of 2006.

As of August 31, 2006, competitors added as many new lines (slightly more than 0.5M) in the first 8 months of the year as they added in all of 2005.

Interestingly, annual total local service revenues are constant in 2004 and 2005 at about $4.9B. Revenues appear to be increasing moderately in 2006, trending toward exceeding $5B, despite an acceleration in the rate of migration to alternate service providers.

And competitors are getting better at keeping customers. Churn has dropped from 2.7% down to 2.2%.

Category 31 December 2004 31 December 2005 31 August 2006
non-ILEC NAS 443,373 964,878 1,487,845
increase 521,505 522,967
monthly churn 2.7% 2.4% 2.2%
industry revenues ($M$) $4,977 $4,949 $3,353

Technorati Tags:
, ,

Scroll to Top