Canada declares High Speed Internet essential for quality of life

William Gayde

Posts: 382   +5
Staff

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecom Commission has declared that broadband internet is now a basic telecommunications service. While most Canadians live close to the US border, there are still many in remote locations where internet connectivity is either slow or non-existent. The CRTC estimates that roughly two million households do not have access to connections at acceptable speeds. Their new timeline has that number dropping to zero in the next 10 to 15 years.

The ruling orders the country's internet service providers to start working on bringing internet service to these rural and isolated areas, as well as increasing the speed of many inadequate connections. Before the CRTC's ruling, landline phone service was the only thing regulated as basic or essential. The CRTC's chair Pierre Blais has set these ambitious goals in the hopes of connecting all Canadians for the 21st century. The new baseline for internet speed will be set at 50Mbps download and 10Mbps upload. Unlimited data must also be an option offered by providers.

The Canadian government is taking internet connectivity very seriously. In order to achieve these numbers, ISPs will be required to contribute to a $750 million infrastructure fund over the next five years. Other efforts include a $500 million federal investment for high speed broadband, and various programs to increase the nation's cell coverage and reliability.

While the ruling doesn't mention anything about pricing, many in the United States hope the FCC will pass similar legislation in the future. As Trump prepares to take office, Net Neutrality will undoubtedly be an issue his administration is going to face. It definitely appears like Canada is heading in the right direction so it will be interesting to see who follows next.

Lead photo credit Fred Chartrand/Canadian Press

Permalink to story.

 
While it's a step in the right direction, the most obvious question is what about pricing? I'm having to pay extra because our data caps are so low, at basically 25/10 speeds and 125GB cap. Go any lower and your caps are worse, when you're sharing internet it's a need to consider how much bandwidth is going to be used monthly.
 
The new baseline for internet speed will be set at 50Mbps download and 10Mbps upload.
That's 5x download and 10x upload higher than our local rates. And we are extremely lucky, if we get contract ratings.
 
Canada: showing the US how much of a backwater it is.
Perhaps you should research how tiny the populated area of Canada is compared to its landmass. This would be akin to NYC, LA, Chicago, Houston, and Philly passing the same regulation. Canada has 1/10 of the population of the US and much less inhabited land.

So in less you have some miracle way to make internet infrastructure as cheap as poutine ISP's in the USA are going to prioritize the major US cities then the highest populated area, the NE corridor. The other areas may suffer a bit but even here in Alabama you have to get pretty far out from a city to get below 30 Mbps.
 
I just hope that the Canadian focus will throw light on the lack of a competitive market in the US.

Data caps as they are portrayed are absurd - the real cost of an extra 100GB is less than US$20 (and possibly less than US$1 http://broadbandnow.com/report/much-data-really-cost-isps/ ) and is now shrinking by more than 20% per year. At the same time my bill from the ISP is increasing with weird little extra charges.
 
Last edited:
Canada: showing the US how much of a backwater it is.
Perhaps you should research how tiny the populated area of Canada is compared to its landmass. This would be akin to NYC, LA, Chicago, Houston, and Philly passing the same regulation. Canada has 1/10 of the population of the US and much less inhabited land.

So in less you have some miracle way to make internet infrastructure as cheap as poutine ISP's in the USA are going to prioritize the major US cities then the highest populated area, the NE corridor. The other areas may suffer a bit but even here in Alabama you have to get pretty far out from a city to get below 30 Mbps.
It's actually HARDER for Canada because of this... providing internet to a location costs a LOT of money... which is then subsidized by the people paying for the service - so while providing internet to Chicago is expensive, the millions of subscribers make it profitable...

Providing internet to a small town in the Northwest Territories is just as expensive - possibly more, because of the inhospitable location - with only a few hundred people there to actually pay for it... Canada faces this problem for many of its universal "perks", such as healthcare, electricity, cell service, roads, etc...

We tend to resolve this by simply having our taxes pooled to fund the entire nation (so people living in Toronto pay their taxes knowing that a large portion will fund people in Whitehorse, Yellowknife, etc...) but it's not exactly a perfect system.
 
YES, High Speed Internet is necessary for my inalienable right to run Battlefield 4.

There's a simple reason socialism doesn't work.

Eventually you run out of other people's money to spend.

I do agree that there should be WiFi available citywide, statewide, countrywide that offers wide coverage and basic access to the internet.

"High Speed Internet" however costs money. If not for the R&D, but to pay the people who maintain it.

Nothing in this life is free.

I remember the days of dialup. I remember the days of DSL over phone lines.

Once I got Fios, I couldn't have been happier.

But Fios has been a $180 payment for the last 8 years of my life - each and every month.

$18,000 for my TV, phone and internet...

I was willing to pay for "more" than sticking with lower-end services (Cable is trash).

All I'm asking for is "basic" connectivity so that people can use basic uploading/downloading services - maintained by government.

As Broadband gets cheaper to maintain and upgrade - that can come too.

But the internet is not a right. It's a utility.

The tax payers pay all.
 
God how I wish the implement ignore function in news mode... #TSHearOurCries

To tell you a bit about ISPs and their price, I'm paying almost double the price in Toronto (As you know, one of the most populated areas of Canada) than I used to pay in Chile for the same speed connection, I had to pay for my own modem, my router if I wanted wifi and of course, the technician to make the installation, which was close to $200 up front.

In Chile, bandwidth is good, latency is good, prices are cheap, you don't pay for modems (Some come with integrated wifi, which I don't like personally but hell, it's free), you don't pay for technicians, you don't have leaving fees and so on.

In Canada, they have a lot of catching up to do.
 
Perhaps you should research how tiny the populated area of Canada is compared to its landmass. This would be akin to NYC, LA, Chicago, Houston, and Philly passing the same regulation. Canada has 1/10 of the population of the US and much less inhabited land.

So in less you have some miracle way to make internet infrastructure as cheap as poutine ISP's in the USA are going to prioritize the major US cities then the highest populated area, the NE corridor. The other areas may suffer a bit but even here in Alabama you have to get pretty far out from a city to get below 30 Mbps.
Naah, that's just a cheap excuse. Fact of the matter is rather, that in the US, things tend to be done in the most backwards and regressive ways lol. Other countries, from China to Cuba, do so many things better lol. Okay all countries have their downsides, but you'd think, given the US' place in the world, the number of rich people and successful companies, that things would be better than they are. But nope.

- The internet still sucks.
- No universal free healthcare.
- No universal free education. (Heck, even Cuba managed these 2, despite 50 years of US blockades).
- Horrible infrastructure.
- Lack of good public transport.
- Extreme corporate greed and control over the state apparatus.
- Still high levels of pollution (and higher energy comsumption per capita, even compared to China)
- Still environmentally degenerate: fracking, oil pipelines, ancient nuclear reactors, few renewables.
- Things like abortion, still up for debate.
- Still no female president (not that I liked Hillary).
- Massive overspending on military.
- Constant meddling in other countries (and then complaining the Russians hacked the election, with no proof?)

Bro lol. Yes conditions are different in Canada.... But they seem to have more sensible people or whatever it is, which causes them to do stuff like that. I'm not Canadian and I don't think Canada is heaven: except when compared to the US.
 
Naah, that's just a cheap excuse. Fact of the matter is rather, that in the US, things tend to be done in the most backwards and regressive ways lol. Other countries, from China to Cuba, do so many things better lol. Okay all countries have their downsides, but you'd think, given the US' place in the world, the number of rich people and successful companies, that things would be better than they are. But nope.

- The internet still sucks.
- No universal free healthcare.
- No universal free education. (Heck, even Cuba managed these 2, despite 50 years of US blockades).
- Horrible infrastructure.
- Lack of good public transport.
- Extreme corporate greed and control over the state apparatus.
- Still high levels of pollution (and higher energy comsumption per capita, even compared to China)
- Still environmentally degenerate: fracking, oil pipelines, ancient nuclear reactors, few renewables.
- Things like abortion, still up for debate.
- Still no female president (not that I liked Hillary).
- Massive overspending on military.
- Constant meddling in other countries (and then complaining the Russians hacked the election, with no proof?)

Bro lol. Yes conditions are different in Canada.... But they seem to have more sensible people or whatever it is, which causes them to do stuff like that. I'm not Canadian and I don't think Canada is heaven: except when compared to the US.
All I can simply say is that you lack a clear understanding of how any of your list works.

No country on Earth offers Universal Free anything - they tax their citizens and other entities to provide those services.

So no bro it doesn't have anything to do with sensibility. The main issue is your lack of differentiation between your personal opinion and reality. Your specious points take questionable "facts" and apply your assumptions to them, presenting them as "truth."
 
It's actually HARDER for Canada because of this... providing internet to a location costs a LOT of money... which is then subsidized by the people paying for the service - so while providing internet to Chicago is expensive, the millions of subscribers make it profitable...

Providing internet to a small town in the Northwest Territories is just as expensive - possibly more, because of the inhospitable location - with only a few hundred people there to actually pay for it... Canada faces this problem for many of its universal "perks", such as healthcare, electricity, cell service, roads, etc...

We tend to resolve this by simply having our taxes pooled to fund the entire nation (so people living in Toronto pay their taxes knowing that a large portion will fund people in Whitehorse, Yellowknife, etc...) but it's not exactly a perfect system.
I think you're confused - there are more inhospitable, rural places and more US citizens living in them. Thus everything you've described as a negative in CA is magnified in the USA. Furthermore the supposed pro's of the USA are amplified in CA for the same reasons - fewer locations, high density of subscribers.
 
I think you're confused - there are more inhospitable, rural places and more US citizens living in them. Thus everything you've described as a negative in CA is magnified in the USA. Furthermore the supposed pro's of the USA are amplified in CA for the same reasons - fewer locations, high density of subscribers.
You do realize that most than half the population of Canada lives in the south border?
map-2006-pop-density-canada-sz01-en.gif

Please tell me more about how it's so hard to reach the middle of the states and how density wide it's harder...
 
You do realize that most than half the population of Canada lives in the south border?
Please tell me more about how it's so hard to reach the middle of the states and how density wide it's harder...
The word you are looking for is either "MORE than half" or "MOST of."

It's known that nearly 90% of Canadians live near the US border and about 70% live in major urban areas. That makes the vast majority of Canadians easily accessible.

What you fail to consider is the scale of the US - We're 10 times more populous and live in vastly more places. If you cannot grasp how that makes it more difficult (more places, more people, less dense) then I think we're done.
 
All I can simply say is that you lack a clear understanding of how any of your list works.

No country on Earth offers Universal Free anything - they tax their citizens and other entities to provide those services.

So no bro it doesn't have anything to do with sensibility. The main issue is your lack of differentiation between your personal opinion and reality. Your specious points take questionable "facts" and apply your assumptions to them, presenting them as "truth."

That's just semantics and it's not quite true. The fact of the matter is that if you pay everything over your taxes, like in any other developed Western country you get:

- A generally cheaper service. (Yet the US spends the most of anyone on healthcare)
- Everyone has access. Including your kids and other people's kids. Do kids pay taxes? No.
- It's easier for everyone, as there's no hassle with private companies and whatever BS.
- Since it's public spending, the goal is to provide a good service, not to make a profit.
- Take a look at the UK NHS or the Scandinavian countries: the state takes care of it.
- If you break a leg, whether as a student or business owner, you know you're covered. No ruining of peoples lives through massive unpayable and sudden debt, like in the US. Which again, helps everyone. Especially businesses, as they don't have to pay any health insurance premiums, every time they hire someone.

So in short, it's just BETTER. But americans haven't figured this out yet. It's much the same for universal free education. Take Denmark, you can get a FREE education all the way up to Ph.D level dude. In the US? In the UK? Hella expensive. Which sucks especially hard, when you consider the somewhat decreasing value of degrees as well.

So it's not my assumptions - what I said is in fact verifiable. But in the US, you guys would rather spend a fortune on a new stealth bomber, yet when someone talks about building an inter-city bullet train or free education, then "it's too expensive" comes up. Hilarious madness.

Just deny it all you want. The facts on the ground usually speak for themselves: americans are worse off.
 
All
Just deny it all you want. The facts on the ground usually speak for themselves: americans are worse off.

*Some Americans are worse off. Because of the current system, I have a very comfortable lifestyle and will continue to enjoy it. We have the greatest opportunities for economic advancement. I graduated college with $10k in debt, and now I have summer and winter cars and enough saved for my future generations to not have to work a day in their lives.
 
That's just semantics and it's not quite true. The fact of the matter is that if you pay everything over your taxes, like in any other developed Western country you get:

- A generally cheaper service. (Yet the US spends the most of anyone on healthcare)
- Everyone has access. Including your kids and other people's kids. Do kids pay taxes? No.
- It's easier for everyone, as there's no hassle with private companies and whatever BS.
- Since it's public spending, the goal is to provide a good service, not to make a profit.
- Take a look at the UK NHS or the Scandinavian countries: the state takes care of it.
- If you break a leg, whether as a student or business owner, you know you're covered. No ruining of peoples lives through massive unpayable and sudden debt, like in the US. Which again, helps everyone. Especially businesses, as they don't have to pay any health insurance premiums, every time they hire someone.

So in short, it's just BETTER. But americans haven't figured this out yet. It's much the same for universal free education. Take Denmark, you can get a FREE education all the way up to Ph.D level dude. In the US? In the UK? Hella expensive. Which sucks especially hard, when you consider the somewhat decreasing value of degrees as well.

So it's not my assumptions - what I said is in fact verifiable. But in the US, you guys would rather spend a fortune on a new stealth bomber, yet when someone talks about building an inter-city bullet train or free education, then "it's too expensive" comes up. Hilarious madness.

Just deny it all you want. The facts on the ground usually speak for themselves: americans are worse off.
Just amazing.

People say a picture speaks 1,000 words. Here's one to describe what you've written:
hqdefault.jpg
 
For some reason Win7Dev you attributed something to me I didn't say (it was likely an error in the forum, not you).

My original point was that Canada's ability to set these goals has nothing to do with them "showing the US" anything. The USA and Canada are vastly different and therefore cannot meet the same standards with the same resources.
 
Just amazing.

People say a picture speaks 1,000 words. Here's one to describe what you've written:
hqdefault.jpg
It's always hard convincing americans they're wrong. So that's nothing new.

Here's another one, just in case you're one of those: america is not the greatest country in the world. But it is the greatest threat to world peace. Just ask Gallup. Bet you'll dismiss this too yeah?

I know I know. *Hug*. It's also okay if you can't bring forth any counter arguments.
@OcelotRex
 
For some reason Win7Dev you attributed something to me I didn't say (it was likely an error in the forum, not you).

My original point was that Canada's ability to set these goals has nothing to do with them "showing the US" anything. The USA and Canada are vastly different and therefore cannot meet the same standards with the same resources.
The reply button is weird, so I'm just using @.

Yes they're different. As are all countries. But the fact still remains that pretty much all *other* Western nations have obtained a very high level of development and many of the same milestones, which only the US hasn't. Which, when you consider it's supposedly the richest country in the world, is appalling.
 
I could get 200mb/s if I could afford it, but I won't and I don't need it. Hence it will probably be the same situation for a lot of people with a slow connection. Some of them perhaps just don't care to pay more for something that is not as essential as paying the rent and food.
 
It's always hard convincing americans they're wrong. So that's nothing new.

Here's another one, just in case you're one of those: america is not the greatest country in the world. But it is the greatest threat to world peace. Just ask Gallup. Bet you'll dismiss this too yeah?

I know I know. *Hug*. It's also okay if you can't bring forth any counter arguments.
@OcelotRex
There's no argument to what you're spouting - factually incorrect bias without merit or substance.

I know I'll hate myself but why would I "ask Gallup" anything about security when their stated key practice areas are "customer engagement, employee engagement, organizational culture and identity, leadership development, talent-based assessments, entrepreneurship and well-being." They're a strategic management firm and polling entity. Did you confuse a poll for expertise?
 
There's no argument to what you're spouting - factually incorrect bias without merit or substance.

I know I'll hate myself but why would I "ask Gallup" anything about security when their stated key practice areas are "customer engagement, employee engagement, organizational culture and identity, leadership development, talent-based assessments, entrepreneurship and well-being." They're a strategic management firm and polling entity. Did you confuse a poll for expertise?
So factually incorrect that you can't come up with a counter? Right. Argument via avoidance then.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/03/2014-gallup-international-poll-us-1-threat-world-peace.html

"Gallup International’s poll of 68 countries for 2014 found the US as the greatest threat to peace in the world, voted three times more dangerous to world peace than the next country."

Here's a fact for you. Let's see how you respond to that. Thus it's not my bias, when Gallup states it. It's just that in the US; you're not used to hearing such news about your own country. You'd rather believe the Russians or the Chinese are the biggest danger. Hilarious.
 
Canada: showing the US how much of a backwater it is.
Perhaps you should research how tiny the populated area of Canada is compared to its landmass. This would be akin to NYC, LA, Chicago, Houston, and Philly passing the same regulation. Canada has 1/10 of the population of the US and much less inhabited land.

So in less you have some miracle way to make internet infrastructure as cheap as poutine ISP's in the USA are going to prioritize the major US cities then the highest populated area, the NE corridor. The other areas may suffer a bit but even here in Alabama you have to get pretty far out from a city to get below 30 Mbps.

Cable and phone lines have been deployed to nearly every house in the states for some time now. It's not a matter of costs of infrastructure.
 
Back