CRTC: 5Mbps broadband for all Canadians by 2015

By on May 5, 2011, 9:30 AM

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), Canada's telecommunications regulator, wants all Canadians to have access to broadband Internet speeds of at least 5Mbps for downloads and 1Mbps for uploads by 2015. Furthermore, the regulator says those speeds must be actual speeds rather than advertised speeds, according to the CBC.

More than 80 percent of Canadian households already have access to download speeds of at least 5Mbps or higher, according to the CRTC. The commission anticipates that the target will be reached for the remaining households through a combination of private investments, government funding, and public-private partnerships.

This minimum would mean all Canadians would be able to download a typical MP3 in 12 seconds and stream HD videos without having to buffer, in about four years. Of course, the new national Internet speed targets are merely goals and Canadians should not hold their breath.

For example, let's take a look at their neighbors down south. In July 2010, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) defined broadband as 4Mbps for downloads and 1Mbps for uploads. In December 2010, the FCC then declared that 68 percent of US broadband connections aren't broadband.

If the CRTC really wants to meet the 5Mbps mark for actual speeds, it's going to have to do a lot more than to just push the industry in the right direction. ISPs in North America are very good at thinking up excuses as to why the actual speed is nowhere near the advertised speed.

Furthermore, even if the organization manages to reach its 2015 goal, there's an equally big problem of pricing in Canada. What's the point of giving everyone access to a certain speedy connection if it's too expensive for most users anyway?




User Comments: 19

Got something to say? Post a comment
gwailo247, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

Don't they have pretty severe bandwidth caps in Canada?

Guest said:

Im with shaw in Canada, and no, we do not have any caps yet.

Guest said:

Rogers, Videotron and Bell have bandwidth caps depending on the package you pay for.

cptmds said:

Yes, and they're horrible - Videotron is at 50GB for their standard 8mbps package, and they charge outrageous fees for it. I can't believe they get away with it.

Guest said:

The CRTC is hypocritical in that it wants 5Mbps broadband for all Canadians by 2015 but have approved a new scheme called Usage-Based Billing (UBB) which would make the Internet more expensive.

Guest said:

My account with Shaw has no cap.

Guest said:

I'm on Shaw and I can confirm they DO have a cap, just don't advertise it. It's also fairly generous right now. I have their Extreme package and get 100GB/month. They will warn you if you exceed the cap by a large margin, or they used to. I recently blew through 235GB in one month (Yay Netflix!) but didn't receive a call on it. They did once give you 2 warnings for excessive use before trying to hit you with additional charges. Recent news I saw said Shaw is looking to impliment UBB this summer.

cmbjive said:

More regulatory nonsense, but regulators have to justify their existence.

Guest said:

Can't believe you guys have soooo slow i-net.

I have (in Latvia, Europe) real 100Mbps up/down (garantied) w.o. any limits for 20USD/month!

I can have 300 Mbps up/down for 50USD.

10+ years ago it was like 10Mpbs for 30USD

gwailo247, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

Guest said:

Can't believe you guys have soooo slow i-net.

I have (in Latvia, Europe) real 100Mbps up/down (garantied) w.o. any limits for 20USD/month!

I can have 300 Mbps up/down for 50USD.

10+ years ago it was like 10Mpbs for 30USD

Ah, another "I live in BFE and have faster internet for less" poster.

Why don't we just start a new thread so that everyone can get it out of their system.

Yes, some countries have the advantage of putting in a brand new infrastructure where none existed before, so its only natural that when you do it for the first time you're gonna get better stuff installed. We get it.

Guest said:

I guess it's not about new vs old infrastructure , it's about that US/Canada telecom companies do not want to give speed to customers for fair price.

ArcticBirdman said:

I have been on the so called High Speed 2-way satellite system since Dec 2005. Unfortunately, the main provider, Telesat, oversubscribed and took away most of the bandwidth for us Northern customers. Then they started slowing down traffic from 8 Am until 12 Midnight. Now they are also blocking P2P during this same time, plus a cap of 20 GB with $2/GB above or get slowed down to dial-up. Even our speeds are a joke. I pay $150 for 2 Mbps, but only get that for 25% of the day, and my cost is lower then what most pay, some as much as $400 for 2 Mbps and 5 GB cap and $25/GB after that. Of course, when we complain, CRTC sides with the provider. There is supposed to be a new satellite going up in June or July that will provide 15 to 25 Mbps, but at what cost and what hardware is required. Japan put up a satellite back in 2007 which provided speeds of 100 Mbps to 1.5 Gbps, so why are we still in the stone age.

Trainass said:

Ok, to those saying that there is a bandwidth cap. It is not a bandwidth cap, it is a data cap. Bandwidth is how fast you receive the information. Data is the information itself.

Shaw is going to be enforcing its data caps this fall. TELUS also has data caps and is rumoured to be enforcing them soon as well. Shaw may have some faster speeds, but their data caps are garbage. 100GB is supposed to be more than enough on their 25/2.5 plan, but they'll sell you more data if you want. TELUS is a little more resonable. 250GB for their 25/2 plan, and 175GB (or is it 150GB) for their 15/1 plan.

Lionvibez said:

I laugh when I see post like this about how your internet is so much faster in (insert small european country here)

Guess what genius when your country is the size of USA or Canada and you have to dig cable to cover the whole country image what speeds you would be getting and how much more expensive it would be. North america can fit 25 Latvia inside our borders.

When you understand that landmass = longer distances = more expensive then post noob.

ucould2 ucould2 said:

ArcticBirdman said: so why are we still in the stone age.

Your *stoneage* I want a piece of please !

Here in thelandofdownunder we have 'polies' who say you can't have nuclear now more than ever since the events in Japan (prayers & hope to the survivors) which is the raw power you need to drive coper broardband. Then turn about face and scream about the actual physical outlay cost of installing a fiber optic *National Broadband Network* labelling it as fatuous (yes my point is as minute as is the amout of electricity lost through coper), but the bottom line is who eventually PAYS for wastage? Well that would be us the End User !!

gwailo247, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

Your *stoneage* I want a piece of please !

Here in thelandofdownunder we have 'polies' who say you can't have nuclear now more than ever since the events in Japan (prayers & hope to the survivors) which is the raw power you need to drive coper broardband. Then turn about face and scream about the actual physical outlay cost of installing a fiber optic *National Broadband Network* labelling it as fatuous (yes my point is as minute as is the amout of electricity lost through coper), but the bottom line is who eventually PAYS for wastage? Well that would be us the End User !!

Move to Latvia. =)

Guest said:

Latvia? What is it?

Is it some food? =')

Trainass said:

Latvia? What is it?

Is it some food? ='

DURR

Latvia

Guest said:

I know what is Latvia lol

why you so serious? =')

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.