Frequent readers of this page know that the issue of affordable broadband is one of my special interests, and has been for more than a decade.

There was a new report that landed on my desk last week from the National Governors Association, seeking to expand the affordability of broadband services, with strategies characterized as having “emerged among leading best practices”:

• Providing direct customer assistance;
• Incentivizing affordable rates through grant programs;
• Expanding service options; and,
• Investing in infrastructure and community anchor institutions.

The report cites data from Pew Research Center that “show adults making less than $30,000 annually are half as likely to report having home internet access as adults making $75,000 or more, with only 57 percent of low-income households reporting access in 2021.”

While only 57% of low-income households report having home internet access, the same survey indicates 86% of low-income households are using the internet. Nearly 30% of low-income households are using the internet without having access at their own home. In 2005, just 7% of low-income households had home internet access while 49% used the internet.

Pew Research is a data rich source of information for strategic policy development. Canadians should be envious. I’ve often said that we need more data to help with decision-making, especially in the delivery of communications services to under-served populations.

In early September, Environics Institute released “Lessons Learned: The Pandemic and Learning from Home in Canada” [pdf, 4.6 MB]. The report is based on a survey conducted in late November / December of 2020.

Keeping in mind that this was from a year ago, during some of the darkest days of the pandemic, I found this excerpt to be troubling:

Canadians are more likely than Americans to express concerns about the affordability of their internet or cellphone connections.

Not surprisingly, the level of concern in Canada about internet and cellphone affordability is much higher among those with lower household incomes.

Keep in mind that compared to our neighbours to the south, Canada appears to have higher levels of adoption of connectivity among lower income households, despite the availability of direct government funding for Lifeline communications services in the United States.

There isn’t an easy answer to the issue of affordability. The knee-jerk reaction by some is that lower prices are the answer. While it would be popular – who doesn’t want lower prices for everything? – in reality, lower average prices simply won’t solve the issue for the most vulnerable households, who need special affordability programs for a variety of essential services.

To date, in Canada those targeted programs have been initiatives created (and funded) by the private sector.

The Environics report had a thought provoking section with “Concluding reflections”:

One of the great strengths of Canada’s systems of public education has been their ability to promote equality of opportunity. Through publicly funded education, students from different backgrounds can benefit from well-trained teachers and well-equipped classrooms. For many students, the short term effect of the COVID-19 pandemic, through the switch to online learning, has been to effectively “privatize” our educational infrastructure, as families have had to rely on their own resources to provide the spaces, tools and connections needed for ongoing learning.

Could or should government be doing more with direct social services funding for services and devices?

What new approaches should be considered for more equitable delivery of digital government services?

Canadian government policy for auctioning radio airwaves may be costing you $100 per year on your mobile phone bill.

That’s what Robert Crandall (a noted economist from the Technology Policy Institute in Washington) wrote in Policy Options last week. In “How Canada’s wireless spectrum policy drives up mobile rates”, Crandall says

Canada’s three national carriers have had to charge their subscribers an average of $74 per year – equal to 9.4 per cent of the average bill – just to cover the cost of acquiring these spectrum rights, which are long-term investments that must earn a return for their shareholders. The prices paid in July’s auction could add another 3.1 percentage points to the average bill, or $25 per subscriber per year, raising the total cost per subscriber to almost $100 per year.

In his article, Crandall calculates that Canada’s spectrum policies have driven national wireless service providers to end up paying “more than 15 times the prices paid by carriers in Germany, France or the United Kingdom” for the airwaves that carry our mobile calls and data. In 2020, he says this was effectively “a hidden tax on Canada’s mobile users of $1.76 billion”.

Crandall’s article reinforces the view from PwC that I discussed last week in “Looking at cost and quality of networks”. As I wrote,

The cost of wireless spectrum was found to be the main regulatory cost driver. When PwC reviewed the mid-band 5G spectrum auctions, it found that Canada’s national mobile operators paid $2.62 per MHz/pop nearly three times what was paid by US mobile operators ($0.94 MHz/pop). Even including the regional operators that benefited from set-aside spectrum discounts, Canada’s average of $1.81 per MHz/pop ranked highest in the world for 5G mid-band spectrum, ten to twenty times higher than European peers Germany ($0.19), France ($0.16), and the UK ($0.09).

Are government policies working at cross-purposes, seeking to lower consumer prices, while increasing costs for service providers? That’s a $100 per year question.

A new report from PwC was released earlier today, “Understanding the cost and quality of networks across the G20” [pdf, 4.2 MB]. The report examines the factors impacting network costs and quality for Canada compared to the rest of the G20, by building a “network build cost index” and a “network quality index”, which assesses network speeds, 4G availability, and consumer video experience.

Today’s report builds on PwC’s 2019 report, “The importance of a healthy telecommunications industry to Canada’s high-tech success” [pdf, 2.3 MB], that found Canadian Mobile Network Operators (MNOs) have:

• 2 times higher capital expenditure (CapEx) per wireless subscriber;
• 3 times higher spectrum costs; and
• 80% smaller scale, resulting in lower purchasing power.

In the new study, PwC found Canada ranks highest in the G20 on the network quality index, leading in terms of network speed, and being among the top countries for 4G availability and video experience. “This means that Canada has both the highest costs in the G20 to build wireless networks, while maintaining leading quality networks.”

The report notes that Canada is the second least densely populated country in the G20, behind only Australia. However, in contrast to Australia, “Canada has many more small towns dispersed across the country, which in part contributes to 50% more cell towers per capita, and 33% higher capital expenditure.”

The cost of wireless spectrum was found to be the main regulatory cost driver. When PwC reviewed the mid-band 5G spectrum auctions, it found that Canada’s national mobile operators paid $2.62 per MHz/pop nearly three times what was paid by US mobile operators ($0.94 MHz/pop). Even including the regional operators that benefited from set-aside spectrum discounts, Canada’s average of $1.81 per MHz/pop ranked highest in the world for 5G mid-band spectrum, ten to twenty times higher than European peers Germany ($0.19), France ($0.16), and the UK ($0.09).

The PwC report also considers secondary cost factors, such as: wages – Canada’s average is 5th highest in the G20; the impact of weather – limiting construction season and increasing maintenance costs; and, offsets from Canada’s favourable corporate tax rates and lower electricity prices.

Using Opensignal data, PwC’s report found that “Canadians benefit from the fastest networks in the G20 at 59.6 Megabits per second (mbps), slightly faster than South Korea, which is a significantly smaller geography country, and more than seven times faster than India (the slowest).” Canada was in the top 5 for 4G availability, with a connection rate of 93.5%, slightly behind Australia (94.0%), India (94.5%), the US (96.1%) and Japan (highest at 98.5%). With a score of 74.8, Canada ranked third in the G20 for video experience, slightly behind Australia (75.6) and Japan (77.6).

The report’s conclusion? PwC found that costs of building networks in Canada were impacted by its population density characteristics, geography, climate, spectrum policy and regulations, and scale. Still, despite mobile operators having significantly higher cost structures to build networks in Canada compared to other G20 countries, the quality of Canadian mobile networks are atop the G20 and among the best in the world.

As PwC notes, “It’s an achievement worth celebrating, but one that should be recognized in the context of what it takes to build and maintain wireless networks in Canada—especially as 5G networks are rolled out across the country.”

Is using regulation to fight fake news a lesser or a greater evil?

Misinformation and disinformation, sometimes called “fake news”, is recognized to be a global problem, but how do we (or even, how should we) deal with it?

Is it the role of governments to deal with it? Should we expect regulatory authorities to restrict the creation of false information online? Should governments limit or ban access to such content?

The International Telecommunications Society is hosting a global webinar on Thursday, October 21, at 8:00 am (Eastern Time) to examine these issues.

While advocates contend that regulation is an effective way to deter individuals from spreading falsehoods, critics argue that regulating fake news will create a chilling effect in society. Is using regulation to fight fake news a lesser or a greater evil?

In this presentation, we will explore this question from a social science perspective by examining and comparing public opinion on regulating fake news in three Asian countries of different social and political backgrounds. First is Japan, a democratic country and is one of the few in the region that the government is taking a non-regulatory approach towards fake news. Second is South Korea, also a democratic country, but the government has been calling for new laws to restrict fake news. Third is Thailand, a semi-democratic country, in which strict laws against fake news have already been implemented.

It is very topical for Canadians, as the government considers reintroducing controversial legislation regulating internet content.

Registration is free.

Twenty years ago, when Michael Sone and I hosted our first conference, we never would have thought that The Canadian Telecom Summit would become the event that continues to be the place where leading stakeholders from Canada’s telecommunications industry continue to gather to discuss issues, share ideas and schmooze.

Last year, it was an online event and next month (November 15 – 17), this year’s event will be held in a hybrid format, with the ability to participate online or in person.

Now in its 20th year, The Canadian Telecom Summit is Canada’s leading ICT event, attracting the most influential people who shape the future direction of communications and information technology in Canada.

For 3 full days, The Canadian Telecom Summit delivers thought-provoking presentations from the thought leaders of the industry. This is your chance to hear from and talk with them in both a structured atmosphere of frank discussion and high-octane idea exchange and networking in a more relaxed social setting of genial conversation.

The theme for the 2021 conference is New Era of Intelligent Connection: Embracing 5G Cloud and Edge for a Connected Everything Digital World. Keynote speakers include PK Peledeau of Quebecor, Robert Ghiz of CWTA, Claire Gillies of Bell, Zainul Mawji of TELUS, Philippe Jetté of Cogeco, among dozens of industry leaders participating as speakers and panelists in the event.

The Canadian Telecom Summit is just one month away.

Have you registered yet?