Evidence of meeting #47 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was competition.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Thank you, Mr. Arthur.
I just have a couple of wrap-up questions, as the chair.
I wanted to ask Mr. Geist a question with respect to broadband. John Maduri from Barrett Xplore recommended the SuperNet model for other provinces. Would you recommend the same, the SuperNet model that was done in Alberta?
5:30 p.m.
Professor of Internet Law, Ottawa University, As an Individual
I think there was reference to it just now, and I think it has proven to be a largely successful model. But I don't think it's the only one, and I think that as we start to see an increasing number of municipalities engage in Muni Wi-Fi and the like, there are a number of different models we could look to. The key is to put forward a strategy that perhaps embraces a number of different possibilities, all with the goal of setting a hard target of when we're going to ensure that every Canadian has access.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Thank you.
Mr. Church, if my memory is correct, you may have been the first witness to draw attention to the large geographic regions that are evident under the 25% market test with the CRTC and the change in the region size in terms of what the minister is proposing. I believe there are 84 regions under the CRTC and something like 5,400 relevant geographic regions.
Seeing as you are from Calgary, I want to point to some examples. You mentioned Wood Buffalo, where Telus is stating that Shaw has 30% of the market. But if you're looking at their region, they actually group in Wood Buffalo and Cold Lake, they group Lethbridge and Medicine Hat, and they group Camrose and Drumheller.
It was interesting. When Mr. Shaw was here and talked about going after markets, he never grouped those. He said I'm going after Medicine Hat, I'm going after Lethbridge, and I'm going after Camrose.
I just want a brief comment on the geographic region difference.
5:35 p.m.
Professor, University of Calgary, As an Individual
That's the problem with the 25%. The CRTC either explicitly or implicitly agreed with the CCTA in the sense that they were worried about predation. They asked how they could deal with this problem and said they could deal with it by forbearance. They said they would slow it down or they would make it very unlikely.
The way you do that is to define a very large geographic region and then say you have to have a 25% market share loss in that very large geographic region, even though in the Wood Buffalo example, Shaw is only in Fort McMurray. To lose my 25%, I have to lose 55% in Fort McMurray. The cable companies don't enter those local forbearance regions all at once; they enter where they have their networks and where the population is.
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Just further to that, we're relying on a CRTC report from 2006. I believe the data was compiled at the end of 2005. The Edmonton region is 91% Telus and Calgary is 83% Telus. Would you have any sense of what the numbers are today? Even in the Wood Buffalo region, 99.7% is considered incumbent Telus. That's not what it is today. With Shaw, I would presume Shaw is well near 25% of the Edmonton area. Do you have any figures to update this--which would be within a year and a bit in terms of market penetration?
5:35 p.m.
Professor, University of Calgary, As an Individual
The figures aren't available. This is one of the frustrating aspects about dealing with the CRTC. The bureau tries to get this data through interrogatory and the answer comes back that it's confidential or not relevant. The confidential data is supplied to the CRTC, but the CRTC doesn't necessarily have the expertise to know what to do with it. So the data never gets tested. Nobody ever gets to say, “I don't believe that number, and here are our competing numbers; here's what the numbers really are.” You have this whole process going on behind closed doors, and nobody ever gets to see what the actual numbers are.
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Is there a better way of getting the information? If we're using figures like 99.7% as our basis, but in fact it's more like 70% or 75%....
5:35 p.m.
Professor, University of Calgary, As an Individual
The way to think about this is that you have competition between the networks. Where you have competition between the networks, the effective market share is 50%. Two networks, 50%. So those numbers are irrelevant.
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
Dan McTeague Liberal Pickering—Scarborough East, ON
Mr. Chair, I have a quick remark. It's something we should take up at the next meeting.
In the process of the exchange we've had here today, our party and the opposition has had two questions with the indulgence of the chair. You have had as many as three and a half to four. I think that should be taken into consideration at our next steering committee meeting. We want to make sure there is some balance.
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
The next subcommittee meeting is after the March break. Is that too late?
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Okay.
Thank you very much to both of you for being here. As I mentioned, if you have anything further to submit to the committee, please submit it to the clerk.
Thank you very much for your time.
The meeting is adjourned.