Search Results for: affordable

Figures from the CRTC show that the number of broadband subscriptions in Canada have only been growing at a rate of 3.3% per year on a base of 12 million.

Between 2018 and 2021, the number of households in Canada grew by about 440,000.

In other words, broadband subscription growth is largely attributable to growth in the total number of households (population growth and immigration) and new construction in rural and remote areas.

The overwhelming majority of households that have access to broadband already subscribe to a broadband service. Growth in the industry is fuelled by consumers choosing to subscribe to higher speed services, as can be seen in CRTC data:

In the first quarter of 2021, there were 3.6M broadband subscriptions with download speeds less than 50 Mbps, and 8.1M subscriptions over 50 Mbps, including 0.8M with speeds over 940 Mbps. In the third quarter of 2022, just a year and a half later, there were just 3.1M subscriptions with download speeds of less than 50 Mbps and 9.2M with speeds over 50 Mbps, including 1.7M with speeds over 940 Mbps.

Over an 18 month span, we saw market growth of 600,000, while nearly double than number went into service speeds of more than 50 Mbps. Half a million households migrated from slower speed services to services delivering speeds over 50 Mbps. More than a million subscribers migrated to gigabit speeds.

Consumers are choosing faster speed services as households change the way we use our connectivity, and as prices for premium connectivity have become more affordable.

Growth in the broadband market is being driven by investment in physical facilities: upgrading existing service areas to gigabit speeds, and expanding service territories.

The data demonstrates an interesting transition in the broadband marketplace as overall subscriber growth slows. I’ll take a deeper look at some implications of this market trend next week.

Canada’s future depends on connectivity; enhanced and advanced connectivity that depends on investment.

Canada needs to invest in digital skills development, at all levels, for all ages, for all Canadians.

Easily said, and it might even make a good political slogan, but how do we get there, and why should we?

Let’s start with why the government should invest in programs that extend digital outreach to all sectors of society, with special focus on marginalized communities.

In today’s digital economy, digital skills are crucial for individuals to participate fully in the workforce and compete in the job market. Employers increasingly require workers who are comfortable with, if not proficient in, technology, data analysis, and digital communication. Digital skills are also needed to provide all members of society with equal access to information and opportunities. Without basic digital skills, certain individuals and communities may be left behind, facing difficulties accessing essential services, such as healthcare and government services.

Since digital skills enable individuals to take advantage of new technologies and to develop innovative solutions to problems, upgrading the skills of a disadvantaged community can help bring greater diversity to the marketplace, encouraging the creation of new businesses and jobs, and contributing to economic growth.

Finally, digital skills can improve quality of life by enabling individuals to access information, communicate with others, and participate in online communities. Digital skills can also help people manage their health and well-being, and make informed decisions about their finances and other important aspects of their lives.

There are many areas of the economy that seem to be crying out for improved efficiencies through a digital transition. When your pharmacy tells you that they are waiting for your doctor’s office to reply to their fax, don’t you feel like you entered a time warp and should be wearing a paisley shirt and bell bottoms? That is just the tip of the iceberg in possible digital-driven productivity improvements. As provinces and the federal government do battle over which politician will get credit for allocating taxpayer dollars to improve healthcare, almost all of us who have operated a modern era business can see opportunities to spend healthcare dollars smarter, using basic digital technologies.

But we would also need the stakeholders to buy in: Pharmacies, doctors, patients. There would be different learning curves for each group, and each member of each group.

Most logically, one would work with professional associations to reach the pharmacists and doctors. Develop focus groups to understand needs, let the associations interact with their members, reconvene, adjust the training, adjust the system interfaces, and test again. Keep that iterative cycle going as the systems evolve.

Perhaps there are lessons that we can apply from such an approach when we are looking at how to increase outreach for digital skills development to those Canadians who have not yet gotten connected.

We have learned from the various affordable broadband programs that low monthly fees simply aren’t enough to get many low income households online. We still need to help those households learn how to benefit, how to access the savings programs, how to get basic computer skills, where to go for help, and basic levels of online safety.

I have written before that we need to consider different approaches to affordable telecom service for vulnerable Canadians.

A recent podcast on Light Reading talked about the Benefits Data Trust, a nonprofit that helps people access more than $80 billion in unclaimed federal benefits in the United States. According to its CEO, Trooper Sanders,

Benefits Data Trust was founded in 2005, to both help people who are eligible for benefits, get screened, and help them apply for those benefits. And then also do what we can, working with public servants all across the country to improve these programs so that really, people can get the help they need with efficiency and dignity, and move on with their lives and make things better.
…
So imagine someone who has faced extraordinary difficulty navigating the SNAP program, or what used to be called food stamps, to buy a bag of groceries, or if you’re a mom, and you know, the rules that have you, dragging your child to a government office to physically prove that you are a parent, just to get a bit of help to buy some groceries to make sure that they are well fed. Imagine if that is your daily existence. And now you have a new program coming along around broadband, which is important, but it’s not the same as food, it’s not the same as as being able to go to the doctor… It’s important, but imagine that you live that type of busy life while you’re struggling to make ends meet and just get it through the day, you can imagine how applying for something like the affordable connectivity program would get squeezed out.

And that’s why it’s really important to make the eligibility and application process as easy as possible, to allow those, like benefits data trust, who can help people, make sure that those who can help, can do it. And it’s done in an ethical and responsible way. And then also, you know, to really make sure that we think about more broadly, how do we make our benefits system work efficiently and with dignity, so that it’s just the normal course of business that people can get the help, that we’ve, again, already gone through the hard political work of creating these programs. So why would we leave people without, just because of inefficiencies and indignities in the system?

There are a variety of digital connectivity programs and service available in different parts of the country, offered by telecommunications companies, and nonprofit agencies such as Computers for Success. In the US, the Benefits Data Trust sorts through the programs; how can we help those people who are eligible for benefits in Canada get screened, and actually apply? How can we help them understand the value of these benefits, in manner that respects their dignity?

Just as we might work with professional associations to reach out to doctors and pharmacists, can we look to associations, community centres, and agencies to help proselytize, winning over those who have not yet been convinced of the benefits of digital connectivity? Perhaps there is a model to be found with Connected Canadians, a non-profit organization helping older adults develop digital literacy skills.

Is there a need and an opportunity to create a Canadian version of the Benefits Data Trust?

Can we start by agreeing that Canada needs to invest in digital skills development, at all levels, for all ages, for all Canadians?

As I did with the last Policy Direction, I thought it would be interesting (and helpful) to look at how the direction changed from the draft version proposed last May until the final version issued today (February 13).

Additions since the draft are underlined; deletions are marked by strikethrough.

---

Direction

Direction and Key Objectives

Direction

1. In exercising its powers and performing its duties under the Telecommunications Act, the Commission must implement the Canadian telecommunications policy objectives set out in section 7 of that Act in accordance with this Order.

Key objectives

2. The Commission should consider how its decisions can promote competition, affordability, consumer interests and innovation, in particular the extent to which they would
   1. encourage all forms of competition and investment;
   2. foster affordability and lower prices, particularly when telecommunications service providers exercise market power;
   3. ensure that affordable access to high-quality, reliable and resilient telecommunications services is available in all regions of Canada, including rural areas and Indigenous communities;
   4. enhance and protect the rights of consumers in their relationships with telecommunications service providers, including rights related to accessibility;
   5. reduce barriers to entry into the market and to competition for telecommunications service providers that are new, regional or smaller than the incumbent national service providers;
   6. enable innovation in telecommunications services, including new technologies and differentiated service offerings; and
   7. stimulate investment in research and development and in other intangible assets that support the offer and provision of telecommunications services.

Principles of Effective Regulation

Transparency, predictability and coherence

3. The Commission should ensure that its proceedings and decisions are transparent, predictable and coherent.

Efficiency and proportionality

4. The Commission should ensure that the measures that it imposes through its decisions are efficient and proportionate to their purpose.

Market monitoring, research and strategic foresight

5. The Commission should further develop strong and timely market monitoring, research and strategic foresight skills and use the results that it obtains from these activities in the exercise of its powers and the performance of its duties.

Decisions based on sound and recent evidence

6. The Commission should base its decisions on sound and recent evidence and should exercise its powers to obtain necessary evidence.

Timely proceedings and decisions

7. The Commission should conduct proceedings and issue decisions in a timely manner, in recognition of the need for market clarity. The Commission should consider whether adopting new processes or engaging external experts would help reach this objective.

Decisions of an economic nature

8. In making decisions of an economic nature, the Commission should balance, in addition to any other objectives the Commission considers relevant in the circumstances, the objectives of
   1. fostering competition;
   2. promoting investment in high-quality networks;
   3. improving consumer choice;
   4. supporting the provision of innovative services; and
   5. encouraging the provision of services at reasonable prices for consumers.

Considerations for Fixed Internet Competition

Regulatory framework

9. In order to foster fixed Internet competition that is sufficient to protect the interests of users, the Commission must
   1. maintain a regulatory framework mandating access to wholesale services for fixed Internet;
   2. monitor the effectiveness of the framework; and
   3. adjust the framework as necessary and in a timely manner, including by making proactive adjustments.

Aggregated wholesale high-speed access service

10. The Commission must mandate the provision of an aggregated wholesale high-speed access service – that is additional to any other types of wholesale high-speed access services that are mandated – until it determines that broad, sustainable and meaningful competition will persist even if the provision of an aggregated
    service is no longer mandated.

Variety of access speeds and costs

11. The Commission must mandate the provision of wholesale high-speed access services with a variety of speeds, including low-cost options in all regions, and should not allow in all regions, and should not allow for the discontinuance purpose of such services if this would eliminate ensuring affordable options for consumers while allowing for the modernization of networks.

Tariff setting

12. The Commission should set interim and final tariffs more expediently, including by reforming the tariff-setting process and considering external expertise or international best practices.

Equitable application of regulatory framework

13. The Commission should ensure that its regulatory framework mandating the provision of wholesale high-speed access services for fixed Internet applies equitably to carriers that are subject to the framework.

Considerations for Mobile Wireless Competition

Mobile wireless competition

14. In order to foster mobile wireless competition that is sufficient to protect the interests of users, the Commission must
    1. maintain a regulatory framework mandating access – at just and reasonable rates – to wholesale roaming services;
    2. monitor and assess the effectiveness of its approach to a mandated wholesale facilities-based mobile virtual network operator access service, considering factors such as the specific characteristics of lower-density or remote regions and how these characteristics affect the time needed to deploy wireless networks; and
    3. adjust the facilities-based approach, referred to in paragraph (b), including by extending the duration of the mandate to provide the service, if the Commission determines that it is necessary.

Revision to approach

15. The Commission should revise its approach to encourage broader service-based competition if the effectiveness of the approach in fostering mobile wireless competition is lessened due to changes in the mobile wireless market structure or circumstances of competition.

Periodic review and adjustments

16. The Commission should
    1. periodically review the effectiveness of its mobile wireless services regulatory framework in meeting its objectives and, in doing so, consider factors that could harm competition, such as coordinated conduct between carriers; and
    2. make any necessary adjustments to the framework.

Approach to Consumer Matters

Consumer rights

17. The Commission must enhance and protect the rights of consumers in telecommunications markets by
    1. strengthening the ability of the Commission for Complaints for Telecom-television Services to better fulfill its mandate, including by
       1. increasing its operational capacity,
       2. ensuring that the perspectives of consumer and civil-society groups are better reflected in its governance,
       3. improving compliance with its rules, and
       4. increasing public awareness of its complaint-resolution process;
    2. strengthening the position of consumers in their relationships with service providers, including by
       1. taking additional measures to protect consumers from unacceptable sales practices, such as the measures identified in the Commission’s Report on Misleading or Aggressive Communications Retail Sales Practices,
       2. adjusting its consumer codes by harmonizing the provisions of the Commission’s its codes if doing so would be advantageous to consumers and providing for consumer protection measures in the event of a service outage or disruption,
       3. taking measures to promote clarity and transparency of pricing information and service plan characteristics in service providers’ marketing materials, and
       4. taking measures to ensure that consumers can promptly, affordably and easily cancel, downgrade, transfer or otherwise change their services;
    3. proactively identifying, removing and preventing barriers relating to telecommunications services, in particular for persons with disabilities; and
    4. regularly collecting, reporting publicly and making available to consumers information about relating to mobile wireless coverage and fixed Internet services, including in relation to performance and mobile coverage service quality metrics during peak periods and any other information that the Commission considers to be in the public interest, by
       1. requiring that service providers regularly test participate in the testing of the performance of their fixed Internet services, including services based on commonly used technologies in rural areas, and
       2. developing and implementing a standardized and robust approach for reporting mobile wireless coverage.

Measures Supporting Deployment and Universal Access

Universal access

18. The Commission should continue to take measures, in concert with other government measures, to support the objective of universal access to high-quality, reliable and resilient fixed Internet and mobile wireless services, including the following measures:
    1. continuing to administer a funding mechanism, making any adjustments that the Commission determines are necessary; and
    2. mandating improved access to support structures, such as telephone poles and conduits, as well as identifying and addressing other barriers to timely deployment of telecommunications networks, such as exclusionary practices and unreasonable administrative practices.

Funding mechanism

19. When the The Commission must, when it reviews its funding mechanism, it must consider whether to prioritize funding for mobile wireless services and operating costs of telecommunications networks in order to promote foster
    1. improved access to, and more affordable prices for, retail telecommunications services in underserved areas; and
    2. better coordination of public funding.

Considerations

20. In considering measures to take under For the purposes of sections 18 and 19, the Commission must take into account evolving
    1. technologies;
    2. service-performance needs; and user needs; and
    3. gaps in telecommunications network services.

Effect of Order

Effect

21. This Order is binding on the Commission beginning on the day on which it comes into force and applies in respect of matters pending before the Commission on that day.

Repeals

22. The following Orders are repealed:
    1. the Order Issuing a Direction to the CRTC on Implementing the Canadian Telecommunications Policy Objectives; and
    2. the Order Issuing a Direction to the CRTC on Implementing the Canadian Telecommunications Policy Objectives to Promote Competition, Affordability, Consumer Interests and Innovation.

Every household with a school child in Canada should have an affordable connected computer.

That would be a bold, yet attainable goal. But let me crank it up a notch. I think the goal can and should be achieved before the start of the next school year.

We already have programs in place, through the federal Connecting Families program, or Rogers¹ Connected for Success, or TELUS’s Internet for Good.

While hundreds of thousands of households are eligible for these programs, too many homes aren’t yet taking advantage of the available savings. In some cases, there is a need for greater awareness of the programs. But, as I have written numerous times, we have learned that getting people online isn’t just a matter of price. In “A national digital literacy strategy”, I noted “Of those who do not currently use the internet, a significant portion attribute their lack of online activity to issues of digital literacy and concern for cybersecurity.”

Having access to low-cost broadband is only what we might call a “necessary, but insufficient” piece of the solution.

While there may be an issue with improving awareness of existing affordable access programs, this is a relatively easy problem to address. The government knows who qualifies under most of the programs and can get the word out through monthly assistance programs and through various social services agencies.

We need to develop more programs and develop partnerships with relevant social services agencies and organizations to assist with digital literacy training, as I discussed a few weeks ago.

Still, a problem we run into is that the carriers participating in these programs do not offer service in many rural and remote areas of the country, representing a significant number of households.

How do we cover the gap?

Perhaps governments at all levels may need to explore direct subsidies to assist with alternative access technologies. In some cases, there are smaller rural service providers; in other areas, broadband service may be available from a mobile or fixed wireless provider. In the most remote areas, satellite may be the only viable solution. In each of these cases, the lowest priced option would still be too expensive for some households. Perhaps it is time for the Federal Government to enhance its Connecting Families program, to expand the list of carriers and to offer a direct subsidy to qualifying households in areas that don’t have a participating service providers.

An effective broadband subsidy program for low-income households would have several key components, enabling eligible households to have choice of service provider and service levels. The approach of a direct government subsidy paid to the service provider could lead to the emergence of companies and agencies with a targeted focus on serving this segment of the market. Work would need to be done, and done quickly to be ready for school in September:

• Eligibility criteria: The program could use the same criteria as Connecting Families to receive the subsidy (families receiving the maximum Canada Child Benefit and low-income seniors receiving the maximum Guaranteed Income Supplement).
• Subsidy amount: The subsidy should be sufficient to make broadband service affordable for low-income households, taking into account the cost of internet service and any necessary equipment. The subsidy could be paid directly to the participating service provider, and cover up to a designated portion of the monthly price, up to a subsidy of some fixed level per month (for example, up to $50 per month subsidy).
• Provider options: By offering a direct subsidy, eligible households can choose the service that best meets their needs and preferences.
• Ongoing support: The program needs to include ongoing support to low-income households, such as troubleshooting assistance and education on how to use the internet and access government services.
• Data Privacy and security: The program must ensure that personal data and information of low-income households is protected and not shared without consent.
• Measurable outcomes: The program should have clear objectives and metrics in place to measure the impact and effectiveness of the subsidy, in order to make any necessary adjustments and improvements.

There are all sorts of issues that would need to be sorted through: getting devices, setting up appropriate financial controls, monitoring eligible regions, and so much more. I am not so naive as to think this would all get resolved this year, but it could. Couldn’t it? Shouldn’t it?

In one of my posts last week, I quoted an editorial in the Globe and Mail, “If there is no definition of success, there cannot be failure. And if there is no failure, there is no risk of accountability.”

I’d like to see the next budget take a risk and set a bold, but attainable objective: Every household with a school child in Canada should have an affordable connected computer.

---

¹ As part of its plan to acquire Shaw, Rogers has said it “will also expand its Connected for Success program nationally to reach every Canadian where the combined company offers Internet services.” In its appearance at the Parliamentary INDU Committee last week, Rogers hinted that it plans to launch a wireless complement to Connected for Success. TELUS currently offers mobile plans for youth and seniors under its Mobility for Good program.

What happens if you ask a powerful Artificial Intelligence engine (ChatGPT) to “prepare 1000-2000 words on the most important issues facing Canadian telecom policy”?

Telecommunications policy in Canada is a complex and ever-evolving field, with a variety of important issues facing the industry and government regulators. Some of the most significant issues include:

1. Network expansion and infrastructure development: Canada’s telecommunications infrastructure is facing increasing pressure to keep up with the growing demand for data and internet services. This includes expanding high-speed broadband access to rural and remote areas, as well as upgrading existing networks to support the latest technologies and services.
2. Competition and market structure: The Canadian telecommunications market is dominated by a small number of large companies, which has led to concerns about lack of competition and high prices for consumers. Regulators are working to promote competition and increase choice for consumers through measures such as spectrum auctions and wholesale access rules.
3. Net neutrality: Net neutrality is the principle that all internet traffic should be treated equally, without discrimination or preference given to certain types of traffic or services. Canada has recently implemented net neutrality rules, but the issue is still a contentious one, with some arguing that it stifles innovation and harms competition.
4. Privacy and security: As telecommunications networks become increasingly integrated into our daily lives, there are growing concerns about the security and privacy of personal data. The government has implemented new regulations to protect personal information and ensure that companies are transparent about their data collection and usage practices.
5. Spectrum management: Spectrum is a finite resource that is essential for the operation of telecommunications services. The government manages the allocation of spectrum through auctions and licensing, but there are ongoing debates about how to best allocate and use this valuable resource to support innovation and competition in the telecommunications industry.
6. Interconnection and roaming: Interconnection refers to the ability of different telecommunications networks to connect and exchange traffic, while roaming refers to the ability of mobile devices to connect to other networks when outside of their home network area. These issues are important for ensuring that consumers can access services and connect with others, regardless of their location or the network they are using.
7. 5G: 5G is the next generation of mobile networks that promises faster download and upload speeds, lower latency, and increased capacity for more devices. It’s also expected to enable new technologies like Internet of Things (IoT) and self-driving cars. This is an important issue for Canada’s telecommunication policy, as it will affect the country’s competitiveness in the global economy.
8. Affordable access: Affordable access to the internet and telephone services is a major issue in Canada, particularly in rural and remote areas. The government is working to increase affordability through programs such as the Universal Broadband Fund, which aims to expand high-speed internet access to underserved areas.
9. Telecommunications innovation: The telecommunications industry is constantly evolving, with new technologies and services being developed all the time. Regulators are faced with the challenge of fostering innovation while also ensuring that the industry remains stable and competitive.
10. International trade: Canada’s telecommunications industry is closely tied to the global economy, and the country is heavily involved in international trade agreements and negotiations. This includes issues such as cross-border data flows and market access for Canadian companies in other countries.

The above-mentioned issues are just a few of the key challenges facing Canadian telecommunications policy today. It is important for government regulators and industry stakeholders to work together to find solutions that promote innovation, competition, and consumer choice while also protecting privacy, security, and affordability.

In an undergrad telecom course, I’d score it as a B-plus. It succeeded in canvassing issues overall, but it is incomplete in the discussion portion of many items, partly due to my imposition of a limited word count. The system got item 8 wrong, conflating the issue of “Affordable access” with government programs to assist investment in infrastructure expansion (which is better covered in item 1). However, given that some academics have supported development of large urban government overbuilds (such as ConnectTO) with a goal of creating affordable access, it isn’t a complete surprise that the AI database has been polluted with some misinformation.

I have seen worse papers published by academics and parliamentarians.

There is still a need to fact-check the output of these artificial intelligence systems, just as there is a need to verify human outputs.

That’s good news. ChatGPT isn’t able to replace me… yet.