Industry and Technology Committee on Sept. 24th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Ste‑Marie, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette—Manawan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Greetings to the mayor, Ms. Dandurand and my colleagues in the House of Commons.

Ms. Dandurand, thank you very much for your bill. As has been said since the beginning of the meeting, as well as in speeches in the House, this is a major problem across Quebec and Canada. When we say that 94% of the population is covered, we're talking about people who are in the cities. Across the countryside and along the roads, coverage is lacking.

I'm also thinking of the examples the mayor gave. With IP phones now, as soon as there's a power outage, there's no connectivity. So this is a major issue, and I thank you for bringing this bill before us here.

You talked about it in your presentation, but I would like you to remind us: What specific problems is your bill intended to address that cannot be adequately addressed in the current regulatory framework?

[Marianne Dandurand, Liberal, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

There are opportunities within the current regulatory framework. It is the CRTC's prerogative to map cellular connectivity in Canada. However, that map is currently based on data provided by telecommunications companies that may not meet the quality criteria that citizens are entitled to expect.

So, this mapping must first be done according to clear criteria on the quality of the connection that will be determined by the CRTC. It's a matter of making it mandatory and using that data to prioritize connectivity in the regions in future deployments.

The CRTC can also update the spectrum policy framework for Canada at its discretion, but we see that there have been no updates since 2007. So a much more regular update schedule must be imposed. As we were saying, these technologies are evolving so quickly and that evolution is accelerating. We have to keep pace and ensure that there isn't such a wide gap between the services offered to people in urban centres and those offered to people in more remote regions.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette—Manawan, QC]

Thank you very much.

Do you know why it hasn't been updated since 2007? It's been almost 20 years. Do you have any hypotheses or have you heard of any reasons?

[Marianne Dandurand, Liberal, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

I imagine there have been other priorities. That said, work is being done to connect the regions. Perhaps no one thought that an update would be a necessity.

The spectrum is sold to the various companies through auctions. When you look at spectrum auctions, sometimes the terms and conditions don't reflect the reality of rural areas. If a request is made to connect 50% of the population of a very large area in the regions within five years, a tower will be installed in the largest municipality to connect it, and the rest of the area will never be connected. Therefore, the framework must take these realities into account. I don't think that has been the case until now, but the priority was probably to connect the major population centres. The remaining 20% is always the hardest to cover. Tools need to be put in place for that to get done.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette—Manawan, QC]

Thank you.

Indeed, that must be a public service today. So we must ensure that there is connectivity everywhere. We really agree on that.

You mentioned the example of the cell tower in the middle of the village, which would enable connection for 50% of the people there. I'm not an expert on that. How does that work? If it's a Bell tower, does a person need a subscription with Bell to be connected to that tower? Is there any kind of interoperability between the companies used?

[Marianne Dandurand, Liberal, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Laws have been put in place to ensure that equipment can be shared in certain contexts. The idea is to promote affordability. Certainly in Canada, with our population density and the cost of infrastructure, profitability is pretty hard to achieve. So our subscriptions are expensive. In theory, making companies share the same equipment should reduce the cost.

Now, the question we need to ask ourselves is whether this is being done at the expense of innovation. Is it still profitable for companies to build more towers when they're going to have to share the fruits of their investment?

These are things that the CRTC has considered. It has established specific rules. For example, it established periods during which a company could be the sole beneficiary of its infrastructure. That is one of the major considerations that are always taken into account in spectrum deployments.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette—Manawan, QC]

Okay, thank you.

For Internet connectivity in the regions, the major players had raised the issue that, if competitors can access their infrastructure, they don't want to develop more of it. So ways must be found to maximize coverage.

I have one last question for you.

As you mentioned, the CRTC has launched a proceeding to assess the situation regarding connectivity. How would your bill align with the current efforts?

[Marianne Dandurand, Liberal, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

All the work that is currently being done will be able to meet the objectives of the bill. The bill will then use that information to make the deployment. So the work is completely complementary. It's as if the CRTC is getting ahead of the bill.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette—Manawan, QC]

Thank you very much. Congratulations, again.

[Marianne Dandurand, Liberal, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Thank you very much, Mr. Ste‑Marie.

Mr. Chambers, the floor is yours, sir, for five minutes.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. It's a pleasure to be at the committee.

Congratulations to my colleague. I know that it is like winning the lottery when your number gets pulled. I appreciate the care you took in bringing forward an idea that you thought—and you were correct—would have widespread consensus among your colleagues.

I want to get a little clearer about the objective. Would it be fair to say that through better data and reporting, which is what I think your bill is trying to do, decision-makers could make better decisions? Is that what I understand? If we have better data on coverage and the mapping, then for those who are making decisions about where to deploy or where coverage should be prioritized, those decisions would in fact be enhanced.

[Marianne Dandurand, Liberal, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

This is what I think will happen: If we have better data and better information about where the gaps are in connectivity, it's going allow the government and the CRTC to use this information so that, following deployments, they are going to better target the regions that have no connection.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

My understanding is that the five-year review is not to be done by a committee. That's to be done by the CRTC or the department itself. Is that correct?

[Marianne Dandurand, Liberal, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Absolutely, yes, that's correct. It's not through the committee.

The bill suggests some people who should be consulted. It's probably not going to be the most popular consultation that the government will do. It's going to target people who are really interested in those very fine, granular details, but we need to make sure that we take the time to review the framework once every five years. As I said before, if it's needed more frequently, we could start another consultation between two cycles.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Okay. Thank you.

How would you envision a local population, or maybe a local planning authority, having input on this review about connectivity?

[Marianne Dandurand, Liberal, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

In the bill, we say that the opinions of municipalities, first nations and such groups should be taken into account within the consultation. It's going to be up to the CRTC to make sure that the consultation is broad enough to take into account the reality of those communities.

If someone wanted to be part of it as an individual, I assume they would be able to have their say in the consultation.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

That's very important. An opportunity for individuals as well as municipalities to provide input is important. I think local input is always important.

If I may, I'll ask the mayor a question. Is that appropriate?

Mayor Goyette, as a mayor, as a land use planning authority, how do you think about the locations of and the rules around where cell towers should be placed? Do you believe that those locations should be influenced by the local planning authority, private organizations or a different level of government?

[Michel-Henri Goyette]

Local authorities should indeed have a say. The RCM of Coaticook, for instance, is a place where the geography does not favour cellular coverage. It's a very mountainous, valley-filled area. I'm told that it would take four or five cell towers to fully cover the RCM of Coaticook's territory, which is about three times larger than the island of Montreal.

I'm also told that the Quebec government had offered companies subsidies to come and install towers—meaning it would pay for the installation—but the $50,000 a year in maintenance was too expensive for them. No company ended up putting in a bid to install the towers.

I hope I answered your question.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Thank you very much, sir.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Thank you, Mr. Chambers.

Mr. Bains, the floor is yours, sir.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Richmond East—Steveston, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Congratulations to my dear friend and colleague. I had the opportunity just this morning to do the very thing that you are doing, which was to be a witness in front of a committee. This is an exciting time to get something down on paper, have it pass, come to committee and get the opportunity to talk about it, so again, congratulations.

My question to you is this: How has your bill been received by stakeholders, particularly the telecommunications firms?

[Marianne Dandurand, Liberal, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Thank you.

Congratulations to you as well on your bill. We voted yesterday, if I'm not wrong. You had a good vote, so congratulations. I hope I'm going to have as good a vote as yours on the third reading.

The reception was very good because they really do want to connect the rural areas. Having the framework to help with it is good news to them.

It's not something that is going to impose some sort of technology or investment. There will be a lot of places for them and for the CRTC to determine how to best connect the rural areas. Then the government will have to follow up on that and invest to help the companies do this important work of connecting rural areas.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Richmond East—Steveston, BC]

Thank you.

I'm going to cede the rest of my time to my colleague, Ms. Begum.