Search Results for: affordable

The CRTC released its 2016 report comparing the price of telecommunications services in Canada to “select foreign jurisdictions.” Among the charts that seemed to attract the most interest from the media was the steady increase in entry level wireless rates in Canada:

Looking at the point of inflection in 2013, I asked in a tweet earlier today, “Does anyone wonder what might have caused entry-level wireless prices to go up?”

In its zeal to appeal to consumers, the government has introduced measures that are actually increasing the cost of your phone service, not decreasing them.

I wrote about some of these a few years ago in a piece called “The cost of regulation“. I thought it might be time for an update.

Here are just some of the measures:

• Removal of option for 3-year amortization on smartphones: It’s simple math: A $600 subsidy amortized over 2 years is 50% more than a $600 subsidy recovered over three.
• 15 day trials: Under the Wireless Code, customers can get a new $1000 phone from a wireless carrier store and return it 15 days later, no questions asked. The wireless carrier now is stuck with a used phone that it cannot easily sell and it cannot charge a restocking fee. This adds costs to the carriers that are not incurred by competing retailers.
• Banning paper bill charges: The government was shown that adoption of electronic billing was an order of magnitude higher in companies that pass on the increased cost of sending paper bills. Phone companies offered exemptions for people without internet, for seniors, and a number of other classes, including people with disabilities and veterans of the Canadian Armed Forces. Paper bills cost more, so your prices went up.
• Disconnection rules: Under the Wireless Code, the CRTC has dramatically increased the amount of time that a wireless service provider has to continue to provide service to a customer who is not paying. The rules are reminiscent of the disconnection regime from a monopoly wireline world, when the local phone company was the only communications service provider. Is it unnecessarily raising the cost of service?
• Regulatory proceeding cost awards: The Affordable Access Coalition filed a application for nearly half a million dollars to cover the cost of its participation in the CRTC’s recent Basic Service Obligation proceeding. Open Media asked for $170,000 for the same proceeding. That proceeding is just one of the hearings that attract cost awards, and it appears to be on track to set new records for the level of costs. If approved, these will be charged to all the telephone companies and can be expected to be recovered in your monthly bills.

Frequently, there are unintended consequences to measures that would or should have been predictable if only a bit of serious analysis was undertaken.

The CRTC has launched a proceeding to review the Wireless Code, with submissions due September 26 and an oral hearing in February 2017.

Will groups that represent the public interest seek to relax some of the regulatory measures that drive up costs for consumers?

The 2016 Canadian Telecom Summit opened this morning at the Toronto Congress Centre.

Here is what my co-chair, Michael Sone, and I said earlier today in our opening remarks. [I have Michael’s words in italics.]

Mark and I thank you and all our speakers and sponsors for the support that you have provided in bringing us to this 15th edition of our conference. GST Conferences was created to produce our inaugural conference in 2002, “Celebrating 10 Years of Long Distance Competition in Canada.”

Next year, Canada will mark 25 years of competitive telecommunications and today’s landscape of services, of providers, of modalities of communication looks nothing like it did in 1992.

• In 1992, Television was analogue and monopolistic.
• Wireless connectivity was an ogopolistic luxury used with the cellular equivalent of the black rotary dial phone.
• Data was best known as the Android character on Start Trek TNG played by Brent Spiner.
• And speaking of Android – there’s another term that’s undergone a complete metamorphosis.
• As recently as a decade ago the phenomenon of social media didn’t exist – Twitter and Youtube were novelties, and Google was still vying with other search engines to see which would emerge dominant.
• An app? What’s an app?
• A cap? What’s a cap other than something worn on the baseball diamond. Actually baseball caps have more to do with Information and Communications Technology than you may think. After all, who ever thought that a Canadian ICT provider would end up as an owner of a major league baseball team?
• Half a decade ago Big Data wasn’t so big, more like Little Data. Well, that’s not exactly true, because of course it isn’t the existence of the data that’s new. Service Providers have, for decades, been repositories of mountains of invaluable information and were always sitting on Fort Knox. Today companies are falling over themselves in trying to harness the power of Big Data. It’s trying to figure out how to sift through it, exploit it, leverage its capabilities that’s new.

These represent just a few of the changes that raise substantive policy issues as service providers try to stay ahead of demand and seek to invest in newer, faster, higher capacity technologies to compete. And competition continues to evolve as consumers shift their methods of connecting with each other and finding new applications, and in many cases, new suppliers for exchanging information and accessing entertainment.

Among the subjects we will examine over the next 3 days is creating the right policy framework to attract and incent continued investment in Canadian telecommunications and how to balance the often conflicting demands of national security and personal privacy.

During the recent hearing looking at Basic Services, I smiled when the CRTC chair gave his unusual mid-hearing address. As many of you know, for the past 7 years, I have used these opening remarks to call for the industry to provide the policy leadership to get computers and connectivity into low income households. On April 18, Chairman Blais asked “Should we wait for others to act?” He continued, saying “Every day that goes by without a more robust Canadian broadband strategy means a Canadian who is socially and economically vulnerable continues to be profoundly disadvantaged.”

I have talked about this issue from this stage every year since 2008. Every day that went by meant that thousands of Canadians continued to be profoundly disadvantaged.

Even before Chairman Blais joined my call to action, the private sector stepped up. Rogers and TELUS have made announcements in the past few months that could result in hundreds of thousands of homes being offered affordable connections.

And it isn’t simply policy that’s making headlines. Our sector continues to generate blockbuster news and business deals. In the past year (less, in fact) we’ve seen Allstream become Zayo; WIND Mobile join Shaw and Bell propose to acquire MTS. We are pleased that a number of the new Presidents and CEOs are joining us over the next 3 days. We are, indeed, grateful for their time and insights.

Companies are continuing to push the limits, risking billions of dollars in private sector capital, testing new business models for the digital age, to deliver new services to consumers and gain competitive advantages.

A number of our speakers have returned for several Summits – and we thank them for their support and for the confidence they continue to show in us. As always, we also attempt to feature new speakers and exciting, hot issues.

You can follow what is happening at The Canadian Telecom Summit on Twitter, using #CTS16. Or, you can hurry on over to The Toronto Congress Centre and register on-site.

A recent news item appears to contradict testimony given during the CRTC’s recent #TalkBroadband hearing that stated, “all Europeans will have basic access by 2013. That’s been accomplished.”

According to the BBC, “The government will not automatically roll out broadband to those areas of the UK that don’t yet have services, it has been confirmed.”

The article quotes a spokesperson from the UK Department for Culture, Media and Sport stating “Our current plans will reach at least 95% of the UK, but we want everyone to have fast broadband so we are introducing a Universal Service Obligation to help make sure no-one is left behind.” The article says the government hopes to have its Universal Service Obligation in place by 2020.

I checked the text of the actual presentation [pdf] to ensure there wasn’t an error in the transcripts. The original CRTC hearing speaking notes stated:

Second, the Digital Agenda’s central aims are much more ambitious than those of the FCC or the CRTC:

1. all Europeans will have basic broadband by 2013;
2. all Europeans will have internet access above 30 Mbps by 2020;
3. at least half of European households will subscribe to internet connections above 100 Mbps by 2020.

How can all Europeans have basic broadband already if the UK government is saying that it could be 2020 before its universal service obligation can be fulfilled? Is the grass really so much greener elsewhere?

Despite what the CRTC was told, Canada’s broadband availability (99% – 96% at speeds of 5Mbps or higher) appears to be pretty good compared to the UK, despite the vastly different population densities and geographic challenges. Just last December, the UK government launched a satellite voucher program, to provide a higher speed option for up to 300,000 households that do not have access to internet speeds faster than 2 Mbps. Satellite is part of the solution even in the UK, a country that has almost double Canada’s population residing in a land mass less than 1/40 its size.

Policy making needs to be rooted in facts and it isn’t helpful to have incomplete evidence set before the Commission.

It is fair to say that all of us would like everyone to have access to broadband. But, there is a cost to deliver such services. The most important questions remain: how much of a subsidy is required, who should be eligible for that subsidy, and how do we pay for that subsidy.

Above all, as I have written many times before, affordable broadband isn’t just a rural issue.

Low income households in Rogers internet serving areas are about to get a much lower priced option for connecting online. Today, Rogers is helping to make broadband connectivity more accessible for about 150,000 Canadian households by announcing the expansion of its Connected for Success service across its entire cable internet footprint.

For the past two and a half years, Rogers has been running a pilot project to increase internet adoption in low income households, a project first announced at The 2013 Canadian Telecom Summit. The pilot service was taken by more than 20% of the 53,000 eligible households in Toronto Community Housing. There were 2,000 subscribed households in the first 4 months, which indicates a pattern of sustained growth.

With today’s announcement, Connected for Success service will become available to those living in rent-geared-to-income non-profit housing in Ontario, New Brunswick and Newfoundland & Labrador. For $9.99/month, the service delivers internet speeds of up to 10 Mbps download and up to 1 Mbps upload. There are 533 non-profit housing agencies eligible to partner with Rogers as part of the Connected for Success program. Rogers has also launched Internet 5, a new low-cost service that is available to anyone within Rogers’ internet service area.

Low income Canadians are much less likely to subscribe to an internet service, even when there are competitive offerings available. As I wrote on Monday, “what you and I consider to be affordable may not be the same, and that is especially true for someone on social assistance.” Affordable broadband isn’t just a rural issue.

Connected for Success is a great initiative, helping to increase adoption of broadband service in households that can’t otherwise afford to go online. All of us benefit from school kids having a broadband connection at home, from families being able to connect like most Canadians and helping to enable more efficient delivery of government services.

Rogers Connected for Success covers most of Ontario, New Brunswick and Newfoundland & Labrador. Which other service providers will step up to help expand broadband opportunities to low income households in the rest of the country?

Although the CRTC has been using the hashtag #TalkBroadband, next week’s “Review of basic telecommunications services” is supposed to cover more than just broadband.

As the CRTC says in the public notice:

Currently, the basic service objective consists of the following:

• individual line local touch-tone service;
• capability to connect to the Internet via low-speed data transmission at local rates;
• access to the long distance network, operator/directory assistance services, enhanced calling features and privacy protection features, emergency services, as well as voice message relay service; and
• a printed copy of the current local telephone directory upon request.

Of course, much of the media attention will be focused on vague concepts such as declaring broadband as a “right”, presumably by including broadband in the basic service objective. That will raise the question of who pays, and how much will we pay to deliver on an expanded “basic” service obligation. And in a competitive environment, upon which service provider will the obligation fall. Who is the incumbent service provider for broadband?

Over the past year, I have written a number of pieces about this proceeding:

• April 30, 2015: An opening shot for the “Digital Revolution”;
• May 19, 2015: Affordable broadband isn’t just a rural issue;
• July 15, 2015: Canada still silent on low income broadband;
• August 5, 2015: Why we need to get low-income households online;
• January 21, 2016: Should broadband be part of “basic service”;
• February 2, 2016: Looking at who, not where;
• March 17, 2016: One home’s subsidy is another home’s cost; and,
• March 31, 2016: Unrepresentative survey.

The bulk of these posts have looked at the issue of broadband, but suggesting a different twist. Rather than looking at the basic service in terms of geography, I suggest that we should be considering it from the perspective of individuals.

The CRTC characterizes the issue as: “The basic service objective ensures that Canadians in all regions have access to affordable, high-quality telecommunications services.” It typically has placed the focus on the part that says “in all regions”. For about 10 years, I have argued that there are Canadians in all regions who differ on what can be considered “affordable”.

Whether it is broadband or dial-up, wireline or wireless, voice or data, what you and I consider to be affordable may not be the same, and that is especially true for someone on social assistance. There are hundreds of thousands of urban Canadians who simply cannot afford the going rate for telecom services.

If we are concerned about affordability, why aren’t we looking at urban consumers as well?

That is why I continue to believe that the CRTC needed to be looking at who, not where we have been failing in delivering the basic service objective. And it is why I was so disappointed that the CRTC commissioned study by EKOS Research failed to address the challenges faced by unconnected Canadians in urban centres. In the public notice, the CRTC said it “will ask Canadians to provide their opinions on the telecommunications services they consider necessary to participate meaningfully in the digital economy today and in the future.” It is unclear how the CRTC fulfilled this commitment with Canadians who aren’t already online.

Still, the CRTC has received evidence on the issue of affordability. According to the hearing agenda, on Thursday, April 14, a number of consumer groups, including 2 panels of individuals from ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) will be appearing.

Lifeline service has just been extended in the US to include broadband, there are significant risks. Professor Daniel Lyons, of Boston College Law School, writes that the FCC’s plan “amounts to a $2.25 billion annual bet that giving a little bit of money to millions of low-income households will somehow solve the broadband gap.”

The oral hearing begins next Monday, April 11. It will be streamed on CPAC.ca and you can follow me on Twitter, or follow #TalkBroadband.