click here You need to take a bite out of the ISPs and you need to take a very hard stand on this, okay. I care about people. That takes a lot of effort and a lot of things to do. And you pay through your tax dollars, you know. Well, the collection agency acts like a bunch of bullies, okay. The anxiety from dealing with them alone is very hard to deal with. We get no support from Ontario to deal with the information age whatsoever. The Ontario Government like to pay very little for the disabled community, okay. And I wanted to say the -- what you guys can do, what I would like to see you do is to be able to hold these guys, people, the corporations, to the hardest extent of what they have to do.
The law is the law. You have to accommodate; okay? I would think so. I knew how to do my job. I knew what the laws were; okay? I knew what the privacy concerns were for customers. But I was a responsible individual with my job and I wanted to do it well. I would like to find that out. You know what I mean? This is what the pretty words in the book say; right? But corporations seem to be getting a lot of money to doing a very little amount of work on this point; okay? If you want to build a disability group and fund for the disability people, go right ahead.
You have my full support there. But not the corporations; okay? I tend to go on for a long time. One of the things that I have done very strangely is predict things. The, bizarrely enough, the attack on the House of Commons in on October 22nd was predicted by myself; okay? I went through three MPs and then Kevin Vickers. It allows everybody to participate equally and in a fair manner; okay?
But I try to be fairly fair with it and I try to be a open and honest individual; okay? And I have no problems working with the ISP, right, to be able to do this on a one-on-one basis. But we need an over group, possibly like yourselves, to be able to help us out there. And that is with respect to a learning disability a person may require more bandwidth and Do you have any recommendations on how to make information, generally speaking, more available so that people in the disabled community can participate more in the public processes that we have?
I would design your website differently. Make it so the fact that we have that inclusiveness without our society. Talking to your MP, okay, or even communicating in person, okay, and having a front line desk person to be able to have that discussion. I know people talk, you know, through the internet and stuff like that.
Maybe having a web forum of hearing the general population, okay, and where you could be able to hear from multiple different voices over a vast quantity of issues and stuff like that. Those are good points. Those are a number of very good suggestions and we thank you for them. Well, thank you for your participation.
So thank you very much. Please introduce yourself and your colleagues, and you have 15 minutes for your presentation. Thank you, Madam Secretary, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, Commission staff. Chairman, you outlined the important role that every stakeholder should play in ensuring that Canada is a world leader in the digital era.
These are remarkable achievements considering Canada's sparse population and challenging geography. Upon completion of the government's Connecting Canadians program and Northwestel's Modernization Plan, there will remain , households that do not have access to the current target speeds of 5 and 1. We have detailed assumptions to support these cost estimates, which we would be pleased to discuss with you. The Commission has asked whether a specific mechanism is required to support investments in transport facilities in Northwestel's operating territory and in other rural and remote areas.
We don't think this is necessary. These requirements are no longer appropriate and hinder future technological developments that ILECs may wish to use to meet their voice obligations. There has been discussion throughout the hearing that the Commission should create a subsidy program to address the affordability of broadband service or a mandate Bell opposes both of these suggestions. We are hopeful that a collaborative approach will enable the Commission to work with all levels of government so that the communication needs of low-income Canadians are addressed by social assistance programs.
Now may be the time to introduce similar government subsidies for broadband. Industry should be incented to focus on what it does best - investing in next generation technological improvements to further Canada's broadband deployment initiatives. Thank you very much for your presentation. I start off with the very high issues and then I go down to the smaller ones at the end. And I was wondering if you had any advice with respect to that. And if one of the parts of the system, this ecosystem of shared leadership, fails to step up what does one do?
What is your assessment -- because you did mention governments, including I guess provincial and territorial governments. To what extend do you see municipal governments playing a role as well? I think we would describe it not so much as an affordability problem but a poverty issue that is in need of a social safety net. Clearly broadband connectivity is a necessity and social assistance programs run by governments we think should take that into account now.
Again, I think our view is that the primary role the Commission should play in terms of exercising its regulatory authority is contributing to the build out. And in terms of the other two equally important issues, affordability and adoption, we see your role as potentially coordinating and certainly reporting and monitoring on an ongoing basis. Chairman, the affordability role being primarily assumed by you. Well, again, Mr. Chairman, I think you, as the expert regulator, could perform a valuable role in, for lack of a better word, coordinating or cajoling other stakeholders into a broader strategy.
We realize that our recommendations for provincial and municipal were very similar. So -- thank you. And I did see that. And again, we think job one is deployment. How do we address those? What are government funding programs accomplishing? What is the regulated sector accomplishing? You know, we always want to see regulatory policies that create incentives to invest in network infrastructure. What can the federal government do?
Well, if you take on the funding responsibility for remote areas of the country you could say the government concentrate on those other areas. Those areas in between the remotest communities but outside of urban centers. So government funding could play a role in closing that gap. Up to you as to whether you would want to take that role on. And it would be perfectly appropriate for you to issue a report or a call to action that Social Assistance programs now need to take into account this basic necessity.
But an awareness initiative and one you could ask governments to direct some resources towards. But we look at those organizations as part of government so they would fall into the municipal local government basket. When you look at this list in your appendix here, are there linkages that we should be aware of?
Just by way of example, your capital cost allowance acceleration. To what extent does that flow back, for instance, on some of your other proposals?
Because it gets into a mix into the financing presumably, or maybe not. Then that enables additional investment which could enable, you know, the regulator to direct investment obligations. All of it works together to facilitate the deployment of resources to your goals so there is a linkage. Do you think there are other linkages? I gave that as an example. My colleague Mr.
Actually report on that on an annual basis. And that therefore others, having seen your views, will be able to comment on it as well. What role do you see other champions playing? Other leaders in the stakeholder community, some of your CEOs, for instance, ministers. Well, I think the role that industry can and should play -- which is why we focused on it -- is being the champion of the build out of next generation infrastructure. I think that is the role for industry. That is what we should be focused on. That is what we should be incented to do. And so that would be our role.
Say for a given that the issue of poverty is best dealt with at the provincial funding level, which is your argument. That we make that recommendation. Well, I think all of the large industry players play important roles in the social responsibility initiatives. They choose which ones they wish to focus on. That's the cause that we've championed.
Within the sphere that we're talking about today in terms of accessibility, deployment, and adoption, we've also focused on digital literacy and become a champion of digital literacy because we recognize that one of the issues is a lack of adoption. I can take you through what we do in the area of digital literacy, but you may already know, but Well, it's not so much that. I'm still at the level of to what extent do other players step up? It's one thing to say -- because it may be perceived that your position is one that you, the Commission, shouldn't do this, others should do it.
And I'm not questioning the authenticity of your position, but then it may be perceived as then it goes into this big dark hole. The nice thing about this country is that they're free to choose which ones they wish to focus on. And that, in and of itself, will perform a very valuable social function. So we've discussed sort of the governance around this, and your document is helpful.
Is that the only outcome, if you were thinking of a broader blueprint? We say it's the principal outcome because it's one we think that is both realistic, practical, and something that you are able to accomplish without going through the whole sort of patchwork quilt of coordination that we talked about earlier. There are other equally important outcomes around adoption and around dealing with the poverty issue, so we see three parallel issues that need to be addressed and hopefully there are three outcomes that solve each of those three issues.
And we'll unpack those at some point later on, but right now, I was going to ask you a few questions about potential overarching principles that we might want to think about in a strategy. As a principle, the private sector should perform a role in operating networks? Sorry, I just Would you agree with the principle that all Canadians should have access to the social, cultural, and economic benefits delivered through broadband networks in such applications as e-learning, e-health, e-government, and e-business?
We would agree that all Canadians should have access, taking into account that the terms and conditions associated with access may differ based on where they live. Would you agree with the principle that in defining broadband infrastructure development initiatives, government should achieve sustainable broadband access to every public institution, public library, health care centre, or other designated public access point in the country?
I'm not sure I'm comfortable recommending what government should or should not do, other than playing a role in funding. I think it's up to government to decide once the broadband problem has been identified what role they want to play inside that. Well, we -- just the level of principles here.
Surely, if we're giving ourselves objectives we should be able to jointly define them, and I'm just testing with you. You should probably close down your government relations shop. I think the principle you articulated is a laudable principle for government to pursue. Would you agree that another principle could be working with other stakeholders; communities should be engaging in identifying local needs and network options, in developing capacity at the local level to use and gain value from broadband networks They come from a report by a certain David Johnson, when in , he and many others in the country developed a report, the report on the National Broadband Task Force called "The New National Dream: Networking the Nation for Broadband Access".
I guess some of them trickled through to a certain degree, but others maybe less, and perhaps I'll give you homework over the lunch break, which we're about to take, to have a look at those principles -- there are a total of nine -- and tell me whether you continue to agree with them or not, to frame a strategy. Yeah, we can provide you a web reference to it, if that is helpful, if Mr. That's the exhibit which was the one-pager attached to our presentation? No, I'd assume that that was merely an annexe to your presentation. It's the more detailed costing, I think inaudible.
We have not added it as an exhibit, but with your permission, we will, and it is I assume that that's what you were doing when you were referring to it. John Rae. Myself, the Chairman, Jean-Pierre Blais. Oh, there we go. I can make technology work today. And thank you for introducing all the Commissioners. Thank you, gentlemen. That was very kind of you. Chairman and Commissioners, this is not my first time here.
And I know that even this morning there was some discussion of access, but it was from a standpoint of affordability. Clearly that is a topic that is of great concern to the disabled community because our community -- too many of our community continue to subsist in abject poverty. There is a need to make them better. What do I mean by the difference?
It depends how the file is created. It still happens too much of the time and it need not be that way. You know, use text, or if you insist upon using PDF also put up a text equivalent. We need the same level of access, and I demand the same level of access over those platforms as I get through my television set, right, through my television set. That is, if my set-top box makes it possible for me to find where the described audio channel is. I discovered the existence of a special remote with one-button access. Pushing one button I can switch between a described version and a non-described version of a program, assuming the description is there.
How many lights are on your modem? None of them. It is woefully adequate. We need some number of dedicated staff and that when a blind person has a technical problem and regardless what time of day that technical problem occurs, I can call -- we can call our provider, identify ourselves as a blind person and be sure that we can get technical support that will help us. Well, thank you for being there and for your frank comments. Commissioner MacDonald may have some questions for you.
Good afternoon. I do have a few quick questions. You were talking a lot about the interactions with your service provider and where they may be failing to meet some of your specific requirements. Or are there any other companies that really do a much better job in servicing their customers with disabilities that perhaps you could point to? Other companies or organizations that some of these service providers can learn some lessons from.
Better companies? But none in Canada. Not here. Wait for the U. Not any better at all. That can be done and I believe it should be. What about before you actually sign up for a new service? But you have more choice than we do. Today it seems like the internet is king in almost all aspects of life. For example, as a result of your regulatory work, we now have access to take and pay option, I think. I think we do. It can be. Is it a mandated package of some kind to meet your needs? Is it additional support from government knowing that you have unique needs? Is it a specialized fund that may be required to offset some of your costs?
Well, the best solution, of course, would be to enhance employment equity within this industry and in all other sectors. Not just this industry, all sectors. It would do something about our chronic and ongoing level of unemployment which is, in my mind, a national disgrace. But it would do more than that.
It would bring inside into these -- into companies, whether telecommunications or any other sector. This is not a telecommunication specific issue. And it would make it harder to forget about us when new services are being planned for, when new technology is being designed and manufactured, when new promotional schemes are being thought about, when new commercials to advertise products are being decided upon. So it would have both of those benefits. I would suggest that there's a lot of assumptions at play, perhaps some measure of stigma as opposed, an assumption that we are sufficiently poor and that maybe they aren't going to attract our business, or an assumption that, you know, we are going to take up the products like everybody else does.
I think a lot of those assumptions are fallacious and not really based on fact because, you know, although our community is amongst the poorest of the poor in this country, a growing number of people in the blind community seem to have cell phones and all that sort of thing. People say I need one. They say I need -- they need to be able to find me more easily. I say I'm not that important. I bet almost everybody in this room has one. So I say when I'm out with people, why do I need one? The rest of you have them.
I want buttons. But it's a question of choice, a question of when one gets used to. Many of us have -- seem to have mastered the mysteries of technology that I think are a bit beyond me, but anyway. I can relate. I've had some choice words for my own iPad over the years trying to get the touchscreen to work. Welcome back and thank you for accommodating the previous intervenor. It's much appreciated. So you probably had time to have a look at it and reflect on it. So they're a useful perhaps road map for future planning.
So there is an element of, you know, looking back. We should probably be proud of what we've been able to collectively accomplish now that we have 96 percent at 5 megs. But we would By the same token, it would seem we may have -- the numbers may have changed but would you agree that the broad analytical framework seems to still be relevant? This framework is relevant and useful and what I was going to say to you, Mr. Chairman, is we would like an opportunity to walk through the principles in a written undertaking just so that you have our written comments on the record.
Sure, appreciate that. That's good, yes. So, as you know, it's all May 5th for that unless you think that that's unreasonable. We mentioned earlier the capital cost allowance acceleration. You had advocated as well using some of the spectrum auction revenues to finance certain initiatives. So would you agree with me that that's not getting much traction? Well again, Mr. Chairman, I'm an optimist. So we will continue to advocate for that because we think it's good for network investment and infrastructure.
And would you agree with me as well that using spectrum auction revenues does not, at this stage, seem to have gotten much traction either? Again, I think it may be early days.
The government is new. Clearly what got traction is the need to invest in broadband, which we were encouraged by. But there's a lot of programs and there is, from what I've known being outside government, a dislike especially at the Department of Finance for having dedicated funds and dedicated sources for money. So why should the CRTC be taking the championship of some of these ideas concerning, for instance, allocation of capital costs? Well, we're saying that if you take on the role of providing comprehensive advice reporting, whatever you want to call it, to government that we believe that that is a worthy initiative to continue to put forward.
Well, from an optimist, sometimes I wonder whether it's wise to be a Don Quichotte, but I take your point.
And presumably when you or others make applications to funding programs, until decisions are made, all that is confidential. So the way we look at this in terms of our emphasis, and I agree with you in terms of it's inaudible difficult in terms of all the provinces and territorial governments and other funding institutions. Yeah, so the way Connecting Canadians works is -- and Connecting Canadians only looked at capital costs, and we can talk about -- we have a slightly different proposal other than what -- than for satellite communities, which again, was different.
So I'm still -- even if you're thinking about in just coordinating with the federal funding formula, one could have -- one wouldn't necessarily be addressing the patchwork result, because a particular province with more resources or higher priorities in a particular area might step in and skew the outcomes, whereas we, the Commission, have to be concerned about national outcomes, do we not?
Yes, you do have to be concerned about national outcomes, and you know, at the end of the day, coordination may or may not be perfect. You can start now connecting Canadians to five and one speeds in remote areas through a reallocation of a funding mechanism you control. That's why we put our proposal on the table, because it's doable.
In your recommendation, you would have us, if I understand correctly, have an aution process, a kind of RFP, to allocate funding; would that be correct? I'll ask Jonathan to comment in a minute, but yes, it would be an auction and the governing principle of the auction would be that the lowest cost bidder is the successful candidate, we think, because that, in other auctions, has meant that you can stretch subsidy dollars further. So the way we're thinking about this is that you would set up a program where you would actually indicate up front whatever the criterias are.
Everyone needs to know exactly what the criterias are beforehand and we can talk about what those elements would be, but whatever those criterias are, so that by the time that the actual auction happens, that the auction results would be purely objective, based on the least-cost bidder. That would be in the design of the auction. I notice you mention that it should be multi-round. Is that how you would see it? I think we were just throwing out that there's different ways of actually going about doing the auction, in terms of design.
It could be just a single round bid and so on. Once that determination is made, it could be a single-round auction for that community. For potentially communities across the country or bundles of communities?
That's right. It's bundles of communities. Would the process be used, for instance, in radio calls to define where needs are? Is that something that should inspire us in having a means to decide where to launch RFPs and how to scope it out? Yeah, I'm speaking by analogy, not necessarily. It's because I think there is a --I mean, your point being is that once you set the rules, you're not supposed to fiddle around with the rules, right? So you have to have some sort of process to decide what your bidding would be. So it's almost a request for interest round ahead of the RFP.
I think that's the kind of thing that we're talking about. The only difference, I'd say, is I think that the starting point would be an updated mapping process to make sure that we have the latest of -- you know, which I know the Commission has been working on, in terms of working from the maps.
But we sort of thought at the end -- or sorry, let me rephrase that -- at the beginning, we want to capture all areas that aren't covered at five and one. And then one presumably has to triage them as to what makes sense, in terms of a bundle of places? Yes, and that's what we meant by the first round, in terms of deciding the nature and the structure of the auction.
That's correct. And there would also be a timeline by when which you need to launch. But the way we see this from a financial perspective, Connecting Canadians pays up front. So you would know you would get that, in the case of terrestrial for five years and satellite for three years, upon which in the satellite case there would be a renewal. And again, we think that it would be great if, you know, that it was coordinated with the government so that -- but yes.
Tell me more about why the special rules for satellite communities. If you are looking for a different model, please use the direct access form, prices are attached to uaprofs, user agents and specifications pages. Already registered? Download the complete list of user agents and UAprofs available on this site. Manufacturers home pages: Also related: Bouchard de Toronto. Perrault de Chicoutimi. Mcgarry de Toronto. Johnston de Quebec. Marcilla de Surrey.
Brown de Montreal. Ford de Ottawa. Alexy de Regina. White de North Bay. Apolony de Prince Rupert. Adams de Charlottetown. Penia de Calgary. Lares de Miami. Taillefer de North Bay. Malaveckas de Alytus. Shelby de London. Kurzeja de Langley. Provencher de Montreal. Chamberlain de London. Lynch de Brantford.
Oconnell de Montreal. Nasavan de Montreal. Ganotisi de Surrey. Neto de Hamilton. Bergeron de Stoneham. Dhillon de Brampton. Beaudoin de Toronto. Chamish de Winnipeg. Arostica de Bowmanville. Dufort de Saint-jean-sur-richelieu. Greek de Halifax. Ramsey de Toronto. Rouette de Trois Rivieres. Parker de Belleville. Baker de Saint Andrews. Pitt de Montreal. Edmundson de St Albert.