Discussion · Private Members' Business
Branden Leslie Conservative
“I support this bill, but it is only a small first step. Phone companies claim their coverage is great, but rural areas still have dead zones, dropped calls, and worse service. People pay high bills for bad connections, which hurts our local businesses. This bill forces companies to show real coverage maps, and we should pass it quickly. I also want the Senate to review this every two years instead of five, and the government must do more to actually fix rural service.”
“Mr. Speaker, I will outline them. For one company, it is perfectly green with a couple of spots. For the other one, it is perfectly blue. The coverage is perfect, if I go online. That is not reality. It is not reality for thousands of my constituents. It is not reality for, I assume, hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Canadians across this country. Yes, the bill is a positive step. Forcing transparency upon these companies, to show the actual network service they are providing to their very highly paying customers, is the absolute minimum step we can take. I do applaud the member for bringing this forward, but I think it is time to look beyond this. Let us fix this problem. There were efforts by Conservatives on the bill in committee to try to hasten the pace of the review from five years down to two years. I wish it had been adopted, and I hope the Senate might consider such a change to make sure there are updates to this proposal, to make sure these big telecom companies are following the letter of the law, should this plan to implement transparency actually come to light. The other factor, with respect to our rural communities, is that we are thriving for many reasons, in many places, in many ways thanks to the entrepreneurial spirit of our people. We have so many businesses that are driving our rural economy, and more importantly Canada’s, that are reliant on travel between smaller communities, whether in agriculture, manufacturing or anything else. We are yet again at another competitive disadvantage, from the business lens, when they do not have good enough service. I recognize that if this problem were easy to fix, some government would have fixed it by now. We live in a nation where competition is something we have long dreamed of yet have never been able to achieve, frankly, in just about any of our major sectors, and particularly the telecoms, so taking this small step to make transparency emerge with the big actors here would be of value. It is frustrating that when I go close to the border, I lose service from my Canadian provider, yet an American tower will pick me up, and I will join a roaming charge service to be part of a U.S. network. Why on earth would we allow an overlapping signal to come from the United States and allow our big telecoms to not be providing service to our border communities? These are some of our most important communities in terms of trade, and in my case agriculture, that are living with a U.S. signal as their main provider. This country needs to do better. We may not think of this sort of infrastructure as infrastructure, but it is vital infrastructure that is lagging, with tremendous disparity based on where people live. When I go back to the map, just outside of my riding in Oak Bluff, just in the corner, there is good service. In Winnipeg, there is wonderful service. I understand that many people live in our big communities, but to charge the amounts we get charged as Canadian users of these technologies, particularly the ones who are receiving some of the poorest service we could imagine, is outrageous. Anybody who has ever travelled internationally knows there are some countries we might not expect would have unbelievable cell phone coverage, but they do. It is remarkable that people can travel across so many places in this great nation and lose signal so many times. The Liberal government has focused time and time again on fibre and access into homes, and that is important, but in my view, the wireless networks and the shortages and lacks of coverage across so many regions are more important. This is an urgent issue. It is an urgent issue for our business community, for our families and for the safety of the people we are sent here to represent. In the budget, there are nods to this being a problem. There is a section titled “Increasing competition in the telecommunications sector”. That is a great idea, but when I read through some of the offerings of the Liberal government, I see plans to make plans, to make promises to maybe do something. We have suffered with Liberal government inaction on this policy file for 11 years. Not a single person in my riding would say their cell phone connectivity has gotten better. In fact, many of them tell me it has gotten worse. I think of the tower near Carman that was removed, which had everybody in the region wondering, “What happened? I used to get service here. Where did it go?” The consultation process among these companies with the people who live, work and play across our rural landscapes is abysmal. While they simultaneously manage to say that they are enhancing services, what happens on the ground is really all that matters. I would love every map in this country from our big telecom companies to be 100% accurate. I hope that by passing this legislation, we will force upon them the level of transparency required to come closer to achieving that. I recognize that it is difficult and is something that these companies surely do not want to do, but Canadians have a right to know that they are not getting the service they are paying a significant amount for, often $100 or more a month. It is not good enough. I hope we can pass this legislation expeditiously and, more importantly, take steps to solve the true problems of service reaching cellphones across my riding and across this country.”
Mr. Speaker, I will outline them. For one company, it is perfectly green with a couple of spots. For the other one, it is perfectly blue. The coverage is perfect, if I go online. That is not reality. It is not reality for thousands of my constituents. It is not reality for, I assume, hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Canadians across this country. Yes, the bill is a positive step. Forcing transparency upon these companies, to show the actual network service they are providing to their very highly paying customers, is the absolute minimum step we can take. I do applaud the member for bringing this forward, but I think it is time to look beyond this. Let us fix this problem. There were efforts by Conservatives on the bill in committee to try to hasten the pace of the review from five years down to two years. I wish it had been adopted, and I hope the Senate might consider such a change to make sure there are updates to this proposal, to make sure these big telecom companies are following the letter of the law, should this plan to implement transparency actually come to light. The other factor, with respect to our rural communities, is that we are thriving for many reasons, in many places, in many ways thanks to the entrepreneurial spirit of our people. We have so many businesses that are driving our rural economy, and more importantly Canada’s, that are reliant on travel between smaller communities, whether in agriculture, manufacturing or anything else. We are yet again at another competitive disadvantage, from the business lens, when they do not have good enough service. I recognize that if this problem were easy to fix, some government would have fixed it by now. We live in a nation where competition is something we have long dreamed of yet have never been able to achieve, frankly, in just about any of our major sectors, and particularly the telecoms, so taking this small step to make transparency emerge with the big actors here would be of value. It is frustrating that when I go close to the border, I lose service from my Canadian provider, yet an American tower will pick me up, and I will join a roaming charge service to be part of a U.S. network. Why on earth would we allow an overlapping signal to come from the United States and allow our big telecoms to not be providing service to our border communities? These are some of our most important communities in terms of trade, and in my case agriculture, that are living with a U.S. signal as their main provider. This country needs to do better. We may not think of this sort of infrastructure as infrastructure, but it is vital infrastructure that is lagging, with tremendous disparity based on where people live. When I go back to the map, just outside of my riding in Oak Bluff, just in the corner, there is good service. In Winnipeg, there is wonderful service. I understand that many people live in our big communities, but to charge the amounts we get charged as Canadian users of these technologies, particularly the ones who are receiving some of the poorest service we could imagine, is outrageous. Anybody who has ever travelled internationally knows there are some countries we might not expect would have unbelievable cell phone coverage, but they do. It is remarkable that people can travel across so many places in this great nation and lose signal so many times. The Liberal government has focused time and time again on fibre and access into homes, and that is important, but in my view, the wireless networks and the shortages and lacks of coverage across so many regions are more important. This is an urgent issue. It is an urgent issue for our business community, for our families and for the safety of the people we are sent here to represent. In the budget, there are nods to this being a problem. There is a section titled “Increasing competition in the telecommunications sector”. That is a great idea, but when I read through some of the offerings of the Liberal government, I see plans to make plans, to make promises to maybe do something. We have suffered with Liberal government inaction on this policy file for 11 years. Not a single person in my riding would say their cell phone connectivity has gotten better. In fact, many of them tell me it has gotten worse. I think of the tower near Carman that was removed, which had everybody in the region wondering, “What happened? I used to get service here. Where did it go?” The consultation process among these companies with the people who live, work and play across our rural landscapes is abysmal. While they simultaneously manage to say that they are enhancing services, what happens on the ground is really all that matters. I would love every map in this country from our big telecom companies to be 100% accurate. I hope that by passing this legislation, we will force upon them the level of transparency required to come closer to achieving that. I recognize that it is difficult and is something that these companies surely do not want to do, but Canadians have a right to know that they are not getting the service they are paying a significant amount for, often $100 or more a month. It is not good enough. I hope we can pass this legislation expeditiously and, more importantly, take steps to solve the true problems of service reaching cellphones across my riding and across this country.