The story is told of French scientists digging 100 meters beneath the streets of Paris and finding traces of copper dating back 1,000 years. The French came to the conclusion that their ancestors had a telephone network all those centuries ago.

Not to be outdone, English scientists excavated near the Tower of London to a depth of 200 meters, found ancient broken glass, and shortly afterwards, reported “English archeologists find traces of 2,000-year-old fiber-optic cable.” They concluded that their ancestors had an advanced high-tech digital communications network a thousand years earlier than the French.”

A week later, Israeli newspapers reported “After digging as deep as 500 meters in a Jerusalem marketplace, scientists found absolutely nothing. They concluded that 5,000 years ago, the ancient tribes of Judea were already using wireless communications technology.”

I thought of that story when I read a long overdue update on Toronto’s ConnectTO project.

In a report going to Toronto’s Executive Committee, we learn that 45 groups took a look at the City’s request for proposals to build more fibre in one of the world’s most connected cities.

Not a single bid was received.

Not one.

Bell wrote a letter [pdf, 260KB] to the Executive Committee, pointing out that Bell already provides fibre based service to 41 out of the 42 buildings that were in Phase 1 of the City’s planned broadband network. Of those 41 buildings, 24 of them (with 4,099 suites) already have the latest fibre to the suite; the other 17 (with 2,218 suites) have fibre to the node. Bell says that “The majority of the buildings not fully upgraded to FTTS are privately owned and any delays are due to delays in obtaining approvals from the property owner for upgrades to our services.”

And in the one building that does not have access to Bell’s fibre services, Bell says there is already access to high-speed broadband services from at least one other provider.

One would think that the City would have learned from this exercise that the issue is not one of establishing connectivity, but in driving increased adoption.

But, no. Like the misguided archaeologists in my story, the Report [pdf, 784 KB] to Executive Committee draws the wrong conclusions:

the following are nRFP lessons staff learned that helped inform the proposed way forward for ConnectTO:

1. There is little to no incentive for service providers to partner with the City in the absence of a commitment of capital or serviceable fibre infrastructure;
2. Dominant carriers own and control most last mile infrastructure. The capital investment required for new infrastructure by non-dominant carriers is significant and can’t be recouped through the low-cost subscriber pricing targets outlined;
3. The City’s focus on older buildings further limits partnership opportunities. The City’s vulnerable populations tend to reside in older facilities where cabling to them is largely legacy infrastructure owned by dominant carriers;
4. The addition of more City-owned fibre and duct in or near Neighbourhood Improvement Areas would provide more opportunities to engage non-dominant service providers, though older facility access may still pose a challenge.

Come on, now.

Isn’t it really obvious that the RFP failed because, as the report itself acknowledges, Toronto is already incredibly well served by competitive broadband networks. The buildings targeted under Phase 1 were already completed by the private sector, without the need for public funding or involvement.

It is worth noting that Beanfield also submitted a letter to the City [pdf, 45KB], observing that “A public sector entity is simply not setup to be an effective or efficient telecom company.”

I understand that the city wants to be seen helping disadvantaged citizens get online.

We all want that. Really.

It is why I have been writing about programs to target broadband for low-income Canadians for nearly 15 years.

In urban settings, especially in the City of Toronto, the problem isn’t one of connectivity; it is getting people to make use of connectivity that is already at their doorstep.

That is a social service and education problem, not one that should be headed by the City’s Information Technology chief.

Despite what may be the best intentions, ConnectTO is following an ill-informed, misguided approach.

Last month, I wrote “Creating A Better Reflection”, talking about the importance of having a diverse set of people working on problems, to ensure we ask the right questions, or solve the right problems, and to help us come up with the best answers.

As the annual meeting of STAC, Canada’s Structure, Tower and Antenna Council, STAC2022 continued, I had an opportunity to listen to the noon panel today, “Not Just Another Checkbox: A Reflection on Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) in the Workplace”. Mandy Walsh, National Account Manager at Gap Wireless, hosted Amy Derickx, an Employment, Labour & Equalities lawyer at Gowling WLG, reflecting on the meaning of diversity, the importance of inclusivity and creating a sense of belonging, and the impact on businesses.

“Equity, Diversity and Inclusion are complex concepts that are not set in stone. Our understanding of EDI will continue to evolve as we listen to those who do the work of EDI and to those who encounter barriers in our workplaces.”

As we understand “Equity” in terms of treating employees fairly, we need to consider that this does not mean treating employees the same. When thinking about equity, it is important to think about removing systemic biases that may result in unfair treatments, despite all being treated the same.

If “Diversity” is an action, then what actions can be taken? While some view diversity as a result of EDI processes; others see diversity as a first step.

Where inclusivity is social and cultural, how is this reflected in formal and informal organizational structures and policies? When “Belonging” is a feeling, does the organization have a culture of welcoming voices that have traditionally been dismissed? How can every employee play a role in ensuring these feelings emanate throughout the company? How do these elements combine to contribute to the business’ bottom-line in a positive way?

The speakers explored how many corporate policies, processes and structures were implemented in a different era, and require a complete overhaul to adapt to the kind of diversity and inclusion that reflect today’s workforces in Canada. “Structural change takes time to achieve and is usually met with resistance.”

The legal requirements for Equity, Diversity and Inclusion should be considered a ‘floor’; satisfying workplace legislation, whether provincial or federal, is a necessary, but insufficient condition for creating a truly inclusive environment. There are roles for employees and employers to play in creating the kind of diverse and inclusive workforce where everyone has a sense of belonging.

Emphasizing the drive for increased diversity, there is a session at the event on Wednesday entitled “50 Shades of Beige: Communicate with the Cross-Cultural Advantage”, with speaker Tina Varughese.

Embracing Equity, Diversity and Inclusion in our workforce isn’t just the right thing; it’s the smart way to run a business.

I clearly remember a conversation I had with my Bell Labs office mate thirty-five years ago, as we were driving on the Garden State Parkway to a meeting. It was a beautiful spring day and looking out at people installing fibre optic lines along the road, Sam commented that he wished he had a job like theirs, able to enjoy working outside on a day like that one. I replied that they were probably looking at us, thinking those guys are lucky, getting paid to just sit in a car.

There is a certain degree of instant gratification when you work in construction. At the end of a shift, you can see what you accomplished. That is a huge advantage over the kinds of jobs that I have always had. Long range planning, network development, software and feature requirements definition, policy and regulatory strategies: all of them important, but with milestones measured in months, if not years (if at all).

That probably explains why I enjoy cooking. No matter how complex the recipe, there is a defined start and a finish (usually hours later), and almost always a most gratifying project conclusion.

All of which is a long introduction to what I really wanted to talk about – the importance of outside plant infrastructure and the people who are building our networks.

As various jurisdictions across the continent try to accelerate expansion of networks to unserved areas, and mobile carriers race to expand 5G networks in urban, rural and private networks, the past couple of years have demonstrated the dedication and essentiality of those telecommunications professionals so clearly. Normally working in all kinds of challenging weather conditions, coupled with additional COVID protocols, for the next few days, many of these people building Canadian networks will pause to connect over the broadband facilities they built themselves.

Today, Canada’s premier tower industry event gets underway at noon (Eastern). STAC2022, the annual Conference and Exhibition of Canada’s Structure, Tower and Antenna Council, is taking place virtually from March 28 to 30, 2022.

This event is dedicated to safety and best practices in the communication tower industry, bringing together the industry professionals who build Canada’s communications networks. Attendees include representatives from wireless carriers, broadcasters, oil and gas companies, utility providers, tower engineers, contractors, manufacturers, safety trainers and safety equipment suppliers from across the communications and tower industries.

Over the next 3 days, sessions will include: a look at safety standards, examining tower failures and near misses, reflecting on equity, diversity and inclusion in the workplace, examining rope safety, and a report on efforts to recruit more people into the field.

I’m especially looking forward to tomorrow morning’s session with singer, songwriter and mental health advocate, Steven Page.

If there is a special kind of job satisfaction from building networks, STAC2022 provides an opportunity to have a better appreciation for the physically challenging work.

At the end of the day, such events enable inside and outside network professionals to learn from each other, vicariously sharing in each others’ successes and learning from failures.

I’ll share some highlights from the sessions in upcoming blog posts and on Twitter (hashtag #STAC2022).

Section 27(2) of the Telecom Act says “No Canadian carrier shall, in relation to the provision of a telecommunications service or the charging of a rate for it, unjustly discriminate or give an undue or unreasonable preference toward any person, including itself, or subject any person to an undue or unreasonable disadvantage.”

So, what does that mean?

When a complaint comes into the CRTC under this section, there is a two part test to determine if there has been a violation of this provision of the Act. As the CRTC wrote in a case we’ll look at today, “The Commission must first determine whether there is a preference or disadvantage. If it determines that there is one, it must then decide whether the preference or disadvantage is undue or unreasonable.”

Today’s story takes place in the greater Halifax area and the story began 6 years ago.

In 2016, Eastlink proposed to locate its Nova Scotia point of interconnection for third-party internet access (TPIA) at its data centre in Pennant Point, located about 30 kms from downtown Halifax. At the time, the CRTC concluded that based on the information provided at the time, there may be a disadvantage to competitors (and a corresponding preference in favour of Eastlink), but it would not be undue or unreasonable.

In 2020, City Wide filed a complaint with the CRTC, alleging that representations that had been made in 2016 about the availability of transport facilities to Pennant Point were incorrect, and that the data centre is not carrier neutral. It sought the relocation of the provincial point of interconnection to downtown Halifax. CNOC and Teksavvy generally supported City Wide’s position; Rogers and Shaw generally supported Eastlink.

The CRTC again found that the Pennant Point location “subjects City Wide to a disadvantage and provides Eastlink with a corresponding preference.” In particular, the Commission found that a lack of competitive options for transport facilities to Pennant Point, coupled with the fact “that Eastlink’s own retail operations are not similarly affected … results in Eastlink subjecting City Wide to a disadvantage and providing itself with a corresponding preference.”

However, the CRTC found that the availability of “economically feasible transport options” isn’t the only consideration for determination of a suitable point of interconnection. The CRTC found that it is reasonable for a carrier, such as Eastlink in this instance, to consider its existing network configuration and “attempt to limit the extent of any modifications needed for this configuration.”

Finally, the CRTC found that the evidence “does not support the view that transport costs have been a significant barrier to competition”. Evidence in the proceeding showed that City Wide has increased the number of customers served by Eastlink’s aggregated access service, and overall, the number of wholesale internet end-users on Eastlink’s network has grown since the approval of the point of interconnection at Pennant Point.

As such, the CRTC refused to order the relocation from Pennant Point to downtown Halifax, effectively finding that the location (and any associated advantage or preference for Eastlink) is not unreasonable.

For the past two years, my wife and I have been isolating in rural Ontario with our broadband connectivity supplied by Xplornet fixed wireless, more than adequately powering our 2 computers, 2 smart phones, and 2 HD TVs.

My experience over this period confirms my belief that wireless should continue to be a viable component of Canada’s rural broadband strategy.

Worldwide, Ericsson estimates that 70% of service providers offer fixed wireless access services. Over the next 4 years, the company expects 5G technology to reach 70 million fixed broadband connections worldwide, representing 40% of total fixed wireless connections. Ericsson believes fixed wireless connections will drive about 25% of the world’s wireless data traffic.

By year end 2020, the CRTC reports 89.5% of Canadian households had access to the target broadband service objective of an unlimited plan with 50 Mbps download and 10 Mbps upload speeds. More than 99.5% of Canadians were covered by an LTE mobile connection. As Canada works to steadily close the broadband access gap for the remaining 10%, 5G fixed wireless is a promising technology to deliver highspeed connectivity.

Microwave backhaul is often seen as the best way to connect these rural 5G towers to the network, contributing to additional spectrum requirements.

All of this contributes to continued growth in spectrum requirements for service providers that are extending network connectivity, and such use needs to be incorporated into spectrum policy.

Keep in mind, a number of studies and reports have suggested that Canadian spectrum policy contributes to higher costs for wireless service providers. Last month, in “Improving outcomes from Canada’s spectrum policy”, I wrote “spectrum policy in Canada has seemed to singularly focus on stimulating mobile competition, without sufficient focus on other policy objectives”.

As ISED moves forward with determinations from its Consultation on a Policy and Licensing Framework for Spectrum in the 3800 MHz Band (and other consultations in the future), the Government needs to ensure that it considers the impact of spectrum policy on the economics of rural broadband connectivity. Section 14 of the Consultation was entitled “Measures to support Canada’s Connectivity Strategy”, seeking comment on issues including “potential measures or conditions of license that could accelerate Canada’s Connectivity Strategy’s target of 100% of the households covered with 50/10 Mbps within the timeframe of 2030.”

Fixed wireless, with 5G technology, is a promising solution to accelerate universal access to affordable broadband connectivity in Canada. It will be important to ensure there is adequate spectrum available, at a reasonable cost, for carriers offering residential broadband applications in underserved areas.