Spectrum Policy Framework for Canada Act

Bill C-268, Spectrum Policy Framework for Canada Act · Second reading · now at report stage in the House Where it stands

What Bill C-268 would do

The bill would require the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission to set up a process to confirm that mobile network coverage data provided by Canadian carriers is accurate. It would also require the Minister of Industry to maintain and update the Spectrum Policy Framework for Canada. In addition, the bill would create review and reporting requirements for this framework.

Official text (opens in a new tab)

7 statements

Marianne Dandurand, Compton—Stanstead

Liberal
“I want the House to send this bill to committee. It requires accurate data on cellphone coverage and updates how the government manages wireless spectrum. People in rural areas often have bad cell service, which hurts businesses and makes it hard to call 911.”
Official Hansard

moved that Bill C-268, An Act respecting the Spectrum Policy Framework for Canada, be read the second time and referred to a committee. She said: Mr. Speaker, it is with a sense of pride that I rise today in the House for the second reading of Bill C-268, the spectrum policy framework for Canada act. This is an important step in the parliamentary process regarding an issue that is truly significant, not only in my rural and mountainous riding, but also for my colleagues across Canada who live in rural, remote, or isolated areas. We are talking about the issue of cellular connectivity. In recent years, a great deal of work has been done to improve Internet connectivity. I am proud to say that in Quebec, nearly 100% of the population has access to high-speed Internet. With the progress we have made, we can now move on to the next step, which is improving cellular connectivity in rural areas. This issue was brought to my attention during the election. First, in my region, when someone is driving on the roads, even on highways or numbered secondary roads, it is not uncommon for them to have to tell the person on the other end of the line that they are going to lose the connection and will have to call them back a few minutes later. In my area, locals know that whenever someone drives past Mount Orford, they lose connection for a while. It is a minor inconvenience, but it is pretty annoying. We need to remember that there are people living in areas where this service is never available. There are connectivity black holes that need to be addressed, in my opinion. During the election campaign, this was an issue that many local residents brought up with me, and I promised to work on improving the situation. In my view, this is an issue that the federal government can work on with the provinces, municipalities and telecommunications companies to improve the situation. To date, it is estimated that roughly 25% of secondary roads in Quebec are not connected. In addition, it is estimated, I think incorrectly, that 97% of the population has access to a cellular network. I believe there is a problem with the way that this is measured if 97% of Canadians are said to be connected, because for many areas in my region, this is clearly not the case. I live in a city with a population of nearly 200,000, and even in my own home it is difficult to get an Internet connection. For me, this may be anecdotal, but for many businesses and Canadians, it goes beyond that. These are real problems. It is a safety issue and an economic issue, and that is what I wish to address today. That is why I have decided to work with the rural caucus and several stakeholders back home on this situation to help improve it. In 2026, I think that Canadians across the country are entitled to equal cellular service. The main issue that this bill seeks to address is incomplete or even non‑existent cellular coverage in regions across Canada, including in my own. This is an issue that we talk about a lot within the rural caucus. I know that the teams of the various ministers responsible for this issue are involved in the issue, but I think that it is really important to keep it as a top government priority. In this day and age, we need to move forward. It is a safety issue, because people do not have access to 911. It is an economic issue, because this hinders the development of certain businesses. In addition, it is simply a fairness issue, because cellular service should not depend on the postal code. In 2026, we should not have to live like this. I want to give a few examples from my riding. I was recently speaking with the chief of the intermunicipal fire safety board in the Coaticook region. In this fairly mountainous region, which is quite close to the U.S. border, firefighters responding to emergencies sometimes have no cell service and are unable to call for backup upon arriving at the scene. As a result, a firefighter, sometimes even the fire chief, has to leave the scene to call for backup. Some stories are pretty terrifying. Sometimes, especially when first responders are attending incidents in more remote areas, like at the end of a dirt road, it can take several minutes to connect to a cellular network to make a call and then return to the scene. We need to put ourselves in the shoes of these firefighters if they need to reach other services, such as SOPFEU or, in the case of my riding, which is very close to the border, with American services that come to support Canadian services. This means they often have to leave the scene of the fire or emergency to go a short distance away and then come back. These situations could lead to disasters. Rural areas have managed relatively well so far, but it is important to remember that, in the regions, people are entitled to cell service that is just as good as what is available in the cities. Someone from my riding came to Ottawa very recently. It was Andrée Gagnon from Maison Séjour, which welcomes women who are victims of domestic violence. Ms. Gagnon indicated that, on certain occasions, there are women who try to get to the shelter to escape a critical situation at home but who do not have access to cell phones. As a result, they are stuck in a home where they are victims of violence. They cannot leave their home because they cannot call for help, because there is a lack of cellular connectivity. Ms. Gagnon also pointed out a fairly troubling fact: electronic monitoring devices do not work where there is no cellular network or Internet access. Imagine the danger posed by an abuser whose electronic monitoring device does not work and which therefore leaves their victim unprotected. This is where really terrible situations can happen, and this is the kind of situation that needs to be resolved. That needs to be looked at, and that is what Bill C‑268 is about. I have another example. I talk a lot about safety, and that is something that is very important to think about. However, there is also a lot of talk about economic development. Take, for example, the transportation industry, where vehicles experience problems when travelling on secondary roads, numbered roads and even highways. These vehicles sometimes do not have access to a cellular network. Truckers cannot maintain contact with their dispatcher or business. Situations like that are very inconvenient for businesses. This does not just happen in rural and remote areas. It also happens on highways. This is the sort of problem encountered by people who transport goods across Canada and to the United States. This week, I was also talking with the president of UPA Estrie, Michel Brien, who owns a dairy farm. He was telling me that everything on his farm is now connected to his cell phone. He can activate his milking machines and monitor his cameras, but that all really depends on a cellular connection that is not always reliable. There are some really worthwhile technologies available to farmers. I am talking here about basic farm monitoring, but we are moving towards precision farming, which will save farmers a lot of money on input costs when they are able to fully utilize these tools. However, for that to happen, farmers need to have access to high quality cell service. Whether we are talking about farmers, forestry companies, transportation companies or SMEs, our economy depends on our ability to communicate and to communicate effectively. This is the kind of challenge we face in my riding, so it is absolutely essential that we sort this out. As I said, it is also a question of fairness: No matter where someone lives in Canada, they should have access to the same cellular service. It is 2026. The solutions proposed by the bill follow two main lines of action. First, we need a better understanding of the situation on the ground, as we can only improve what we can measure. As I said earlier, according to the CRTC, 97% of the Canadian population has access to a mobile network. This data comes from telecommunications companies, but I am not convinced that these companies and I share the same understanding of what constitutes access to a mobile network. One bar might constitute a connection for them, but it does not allow someone to make a call, it does not keep a call going and it does not allow for a good-quality conversation. For me, that does not constitute a connection. The bill’s first requirement is to map out the situation with much clearer parameters. It is about choosing a series of parameters that will allow for better measurements and for an independent review of the data. When we have a better idea of where the issues are coming from, we can start to address them. The second part of the bill is about modernizing the spectrum framework. The spectrum framework is the mechanism by which frequencies used for cellular connectivity are distributed. That framework has not been updated since 2007. When it was last updated, it was assumed that market forces would end up connecting the entire Canadian population. Needless to say, that did not happen. Almost 20 years later, we recognize that connecting remote regions is not profitable. There is no incentive for telecommunications companies to connect remote regions. The change we want to make to the spectrum policy is stated in the bill’s preamble. It is about making sure that cellular connectivity takes into account the realities of remote regions. I think that the timing is perfect. We may be a bit behind, but the timing could not be better for a bill like this. First, we have made many investments in fibre optic Internet connectivity, which makes the construction of new infrastructure more profitable. Having fibre optics allows for cellular towers. Major investments have been made. Spectrum auctions are also coming up. With the new spectrum auctions approaching, it is important to adjust the auction parameters to ensure that, in the rollout for telecommunications companies, there is not a requirement that 50% of the population in a large region be connected within five years, for example. What that means in a rural area is that only the largest population centre will be connected, leaving a vast expanse of land without any connectivity. We therefore need to recalibrate, and now is the time to do so, as new technologies, such as low-orbit satellites, are being deployed. While satellites are going to be launched in the relatively near future to connect people to cellular networks, this service must prioritize the regions over urban centres, because it is in the regions where connectivity is still lacking. In short, the bill aims to improve measurement, planning and investment. In conclusion, I am very pleased to see that this bill transcends party lines. Many of my Liberal colleagues have supported it. Some Conservative and NDP colleagues have also supported it. Our colleague from the Green Party supported the bill too. As this shows, the bill crosses party lines. I am also very pleased that Senator Aucoin has agreed to take the matter to the Senate after the bill is studied in the House. I am asking for this bill to be studied in committee, for a more connected, safer, fairer and stronger Canada.

Jacques Gourde, Lévis—Lotbinière

Conservative
“Parts of my riding have no cell service, especially in Saint-Nicolas. Will this bill help fix that problem?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for introducing this bill, which could have far-reaching effects and help a lot of Canadians. Black holes exist in my riding, too. In particular, in one section of the Saint-Nicolas sector of Lévis, right in the city at the head of the bridges on the way to Saint-Antoine-de-Tilly, cell service suddenly disappears. These people are asking us to do everything in our power to restore their service. Will this bill help the people in my riding, especially in Saint-Nicolas?

Marianne Dandurand, Compton—Stanstead

Liberal
“I support this bill because it will map out cell service gaps. Even people in cities and towns deal with bad cell service, not just rural areas. Mapping this will help us fix coverage where people need it.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, my colleague and I have had conversations about this. The people of Saint-Nicolas live in an urban area. They certainly do not live in a rural area, yet they have cell service issues. The bill aims to map out this situation. We will see that there is clearly an issue in this area. Then, we will be able to roll out services where there are none right now, mainly in remote and isolated areas, but also in regions like his, in urban centres. I live in Rock Forest and face the same challenge as the people of Saint-Nicolas. I hope the bill will help resolve the situation, even in urban areas.

Paul Connors, Avalon

Liberal
“Cell service is very poor or missing in my riding and other rural areas. Emergency workers and families cannot reach each other. How will this bill fix these gaps in cell coverage?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to thank my colleague for her commitment and dedication to getting this issue solved. In my riding of Avalon and in many ridings throughout our country, as was just highlighted so many times, cellular connectivity is very poor and in most cases does not exist. There are instances in Avalon when police officers, firefighters and other emergency responders cannot be contacted. It is a huge issue. Families also cannot communicate with each other. In today’s society, people use connectivity in order to make sure we are well connected and that everyone is connected with us. How would the bill address the connectivity gaps that exist in my riding of Avalon and in other rural areas throughout Canada?

Marianne Dandurand, Compton—Stanstead

Liberal
“I support this bill because it will help rural areas like Avalon. It will give us better cell coverage maps so we can connect people who do not have service.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I have been working with my colleague, who is chair of the rural caucus. He is a member who is really engaged on this issue. We have been talking a lot about it, and not only talking but taking action as well. We met with Bell and Rogers to talk about how they are helping with this, what their challenges are and where they want to go with it. I thank the member for his involvement and commitment on this important issue. Yes, the bill would help in Avalon. We would have a better map of the situation, and then we could then address the situation by prioritizing rural places that are a bit outside the scope, so the people in the member’s riding can be connected.

Gabriel Ste-Marie, Joliette—Manawan

Bloc Québécois
“I want to know why cell phone companies do not use all of their network space. It makes no sense to leave it unused.”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Signal 27 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member for Campton—Stanstead on her bill and her speech, which was rich in content and information. It was well researched. I would like to come back to the case of unused spectrums. Why do the cell phone companies choose not to develop them, in the hon. member’s view? To me that is absurd.

Marianne Dandurand, Compton—Stanstead

Liberal
“Some mobile spectrum is not being used. Companies are following their government contracts, but those deals leave rural areas without service. We need future contracts to make sure rural areas get reliable service too.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it is true that there is spectrum that is not being used. The problem is that companies are honouring the agreements they have signed with the government. The way the contracts were drawn up requires, for example, connecting 50% of the population across a very large area within a relatively short period of time. As a result, there are places that are not connected. I would say that the agreements that were signed have, for the most part, been honoured. Clearly, that is not where the solution lies. The aim is to ensure that future contracts take into account the reality that connection is much more unreliable in rural areas than it is in urban centres.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 117

  1. Government Orders Business of Supply 117 statements
  2. Oral Questions Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship 8 statements
  3. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 4 statements
  4. Oral Questions The Economy 6 statements
  5. Oral Questions Taxation 8 statements
  6. Oral Questions Natural Resources 5 statements
  7. Oral Questions Taxation 2 statements
  8. Oral Questions Rail Transportation 4 statements
  9. Oral Questions Finance 10 statements
  10. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 2 statements
  11. Oral Questions Taxation 4 statements
  12. Oral Questions Finance 7 statements
  13. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  14. Oral Questions Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship 6 statements
  15. Oral Questions National Defence 2 statements
  16. Oral Questions Public Safety 2 statements
  17. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  18. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 2 statements
  19. Oral Questions National Defence 8 statements
  20. Government Orders Business of Supply 57 statements
  21. Government Orders Government Orders 2 statements
  22. Government Orders Government Orders 2 statements
  23. Government Orders Government Orders 2 statements
  24. Government Orders Government Orders 3 statements
  25. Government Orders Government Orders 2 statements
  26. Government Orders Government Orders 3 statements
  27. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  28. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  29. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 5 statements
  30. Private Members' Business Spectrum Policy Framework for Canada Act 5 statements
  31. Private Members' Business Spectrum Policy Framework for Canada Act 7 statements