Discussion · Private Members' Business
Branden Leslie Conservative
“I support this bill. Phone companies say their coverage maps are complete, but rural areas have huge dead zones. People in the country pay the same prices as people in cities, but they get worse service. That puts people in danger when they cannot call for help in an emergency.”
“Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, there is good service in the big cities, and that is the key difference. We can stand in this place and make a phone call, but when I am driving down the highway heading from my home in Portage down to Winkler, I know exactly where the dead spots are. When I am on the phone, I will say, “Okay, I have to let you go. I am going to lose you here.” That is not identified on the map. It is one thing to lose a phone call and have to pick it up a couple of minutes later or 10 kilometres later, which is worse than dropping a phone call in a city. Where it really matters is when someone’s home in a rural area has no coverage. They can buy a booster for a bit of coverage right within their own home. Another example is of someone driving a combine during harvest and, heaven forbid, there is a fire, which does happen. They try to call emergency services, hoping they might be able to get there in time to save their $1-million piece of equipment, but find that they have no service. Someone could have an invader on their property in the middle of the night in a rural area, and they hope to call emergency responders, but they leave their house and have no service. It is one thing to be annoyed in a city when we do not have the ability to make a phone call. It is another thing to have legitimate safety concerns on farms and across rural landscapes across this country. It is unfair. We pay the same prices as anybody else buying their plans from any of these big telecom companies, and we get, at best, half the service. In many locations, people simply more or less live without service. I can think of Elm Creek, Miami or Somerset. Standing in town feels like we are living in a third world country, yet when I pull up the maps, the coverage is perfect.”
Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, there is good service in the big cities, and that is the key difference. We can stand in this place and make a phone call, but when I am driving down the highway heading from my home in Portage down to Winkler, I know exactly where the dead spots are. When I am on the phone, I will say, “Okay, I have to let you go. I am going to lose you here.” That is not identified on the map. It is one thing to lose a phone call and have to pick it up a couple of minutes later or 10 kilometres later, which is worse than dropping a phone call in a city. Where it really matters is when someone’s home in a rural area has no coverage. They can buy a booster for a bit of coverage right within their own home. Another example is of someone driving a combine during harvest and, heaven forbid, there is a fire, which does happen. They try to call emergency services, hoping they might be able to get there in time to save their $1-million piece of equipment, but find that they have no service. Someone could have an invader on their property in the middle of the night in a rural area, and they hope to call emergency responders, but they leave their house and have no service. It is one thing to be annoyed in a city when we do not have the ability to make a phone call. It is another thing to have legitimate safety concerns on farms and across rural landscapes across this country. It is unfair. We pay the same prices as anybody else buying their plans from any of these big telecom companies, and we get, at best, half the service. In many locations, people simply more or less live without service. I can think of Elm Creek, Miami or Somerset. Standing in town feels like we are living in a third world country, yet when I pull up the maps, the coverage is perfect.