Evidence of meeting #49 for Industry and Technology in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was areas.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

Members speaking

Before the committee

Goyette  Mayor, Municipality of Martinville
Kellison  Director General, Spectrum Policy Branch, Department of Industry
Arbour  Director General, Telecommunications Policy Branch, Department of Industry

Marianne Dandurand Liberal Compton—Stanstead, QC

I think it doesn't go one against the other. We have to work toward a common goal, where we deploy more connectivity because it's useful for everybody—anybody who is travelling or any business. There are important enterprises in rural areas. There is a need for more connection. There are customers around there. We can keep improving other parts of the spectrum auction to make sure we keep working on the affordability piece.

I also think that the further it goes with technology, very often the cost goes down. Over time, it will probably be less costly to connect people to cellphones, and that price will also decrease.

Michael Ma Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

The bill improves our ability to identify gaps, but identifying a gap does not by itself cause a carrier to build infrastructure there, as colleagues asked about earlier. What is the intended chain between better coverage data, a revised spectrum policy framework and the actual deployment on the ground?

Marianne Dandurand Liberal Compton—Stanstead, QC

I think if we put in place rules to force the government and telecom companies to think of rural connectivity and to include those concepts in future deployments, whether it's technology or whether it's spectrum auctions, it will improve the situation.

Michael Ma Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

I guess what we're leading to, then, is that the carriers will have to anticipate what the mayor may provide in terms of population growth and demand to justify their investments.

Marianne Dandurand Liberal Compton—Stanstead, QC

We need that mapping. We need to know where the gaps are. The gaps remain where they are. If we can have a good sense of where those gaps are, then we can put incentives or regulations in place for the carriers to cover those gaps. We have to make sure to know where exactly they are before we can take action. Our actions will be based on those gaps.

Michael Ma Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

Great.

Thank you very much.

The Chair Liberal Ben Carr

Thank you very much, Mr. Ma.

Colleagues, that brings us to the end of the first hour.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, for being with us and sharing your insight.

I also want to thank you, Ms. Dandurand, for being here. Congratulations.

We will continue asking questions over the next hour and probably during the week we come back.

Colleagues, I'll suspend for no more than five minutes before we switch over. I'll probably have to cut a little bit of time off from everybody in the second hour, but based on my discussions, that seems to be okay.

We're suspended.

The Chair Liberal Ben Carr

I call the meeting back to order.

Colleagues, we're going to get right into the second hour of business.

We have two witnesses with us from the Department of Industry. I'm never certain whether it's an anglophone name or a francophone name, but we have Andre Arbour and Matthew Kellison.

Gentlemen, thank you very much for being here.

Monsieur Arbour is the director general of the telecommunications policy branch, and Mr. Kellison is the director general of the spectrum policy branch.

Mr. Kellison, I believe you'll be speaking on behalf of the two of you. Up to five minutes are dedicated to that, at which point we'll enter into a round of questions.

The floor is yours.

Matthew Kellison Director General, Spectrum Policy Branch, Department of Industry

Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee, for the invitation to appear before you today.

As introduced, my name is Matthew Kellison—anglophone—and I am the director general of the spectrum policy branch at Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada or, as we call it, ISED. I'm joined by my colleague Andre Arbour, who is also anglophone and who is ISED's director general of telecommunications policy. That's just to clarify things up front, but we're obviously happy to answer questions in both languages.

I think you heard very clearly in the first session that reliable access to high-speed Internet and mobile connectivity is of keen importance to Canadians. It's why rural and remote connectivity remains a top priority for ISED as a driver of social welfare, community development and economic growth.

We're pleased to join you today to talk about our activities related to the spectrum policy framework for Canada or, as we sometimes call it, the SPFC, which is the subject of this bill.

Spectrum enables wireless communications, including mobile phones, satellites and Wi-Fi networks. In Canada, the Minister of Industry is responsible for managing spectrum under the Radiocommunication Act.

The SPFC is the policy foundation for ISED's spectrum management regime. Its objective is to maximize the economic and social benefits that Canadians derive from the use of finite radio frequency spectrum, which is a public resource. While individual spectrum policies are developed through consultation and based on the specifics of the spectrum in question, the overarching objectives and principles set out by the spectrum policy framework for Canada make their way into all of ISED's spectrum policies.

Rural connectivity remains a guiding priority for ISED's spectrum policy. Our most recent five-year spectrum outlook, which was published in 2023, complements the spectrum policy framework and identifies rural and indigenous connectivity gaps as priorities for ISED's spectrum management program. We continue to implement spectrum frameworks with specific measures to improve connectivity in rural and remote areas.

For example, when we allocate spectrum, either through auctions or through a first-come, first-served framework, we use deployment requirements that are intended to get spectrum into use. These requirements ramp up over time and are intended to support a “use it or lose it” approach to spectrum licensing. In our recent spectrum auctions, we have been strengthening these requirements, and we have been targeting them to smaller areas, including rural and remote communities, to make sure that spectrum is put to use everywhere.

Our policies also seek to lower barriers for small, rural, indigenous and community-based providers to support greater competition, more consumer choice and better connectivity in rural and remote areas. For example, our local licensing framework, which we launched last year, provides easy, automated access to the 5G spectrum on a local basis wherever it's needed by rural wireless Internet service providers, industrial and private network users and indigenous communities. Similarly, our recently launched access licensing framework makes already licensed but unused spectrum in rural areas available to new users so that it can be put to use, including to connect rural and indigenous communities.

Finally, ISED is leveraging a range of technologies to try to close connectivity gaps in some of the hardest to reach areas of Canada. In 2025, ISED established a supplemental mobile coverage by satellite framework, which will enable satellite-to-cell services to close persistent mobile coverage gaps, particularly along rural, remote and rural roads.

In doing this, ISED is guided by the principles in the spectrum policy framework to advance our overall objective of maximizing the economic and social benefits that Canadians derive from spectrum.

Bill C-268 reinforces work already under way within our spectrum management program. It would require the minister to review the framework every five years, in consultation with a series of stakeholders, and table a report in Parliament. It would also require the minister to identify potential updates to the framework with a priority for connectivity. The bill also requires the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, or CRTC, to establish a process to ensure the accuracy of mobile coverage data. This is consistent with a regulatory process the CRTC launched in January, and we understand that new requirements on industry will be issued soon.

This bill is consistent with our ongoing efforts to ensure that Canada's spectrum policy remains responsive to technological and industry changes, ultimately supporting our overall objective that spectrum is put to use to maximize its benefits for Canadians.

Thank you for your time. I would be happy to answer any questions.

The Chair Liberal Ben Carr

Thank you very much, Mr. Kellison.

Colleagues, we are going to reduce the amount of time in the rounds. We're going to go with four minutes.

Mr. Mazier, if you need five, that's fine. We'll go for five and then four. Is that okay?

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Mazier Conservative Riding Mountain, MB

Thanks, Chair.

The Chair Liberal Ben Carr

Now, I did want to note, Mr. Mazier, before I turn the floor over to you, that in the previous version of this committee, there were two Manitobans at this table—Madam Dancho and Mr. Falk—who are no longer here, so it's lovely to be accompanied by a fellow Manitoban.

With that, I'll turn the floor over to you, sir.

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Mazier Conservative Riding Mountain, MB

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses.

Mr. Kellison, a spectrum deployment requirement is supposed to make sure a company that buys spectrum actually uses it to connect people. Under the government's 3800 megahertz decision, a licence in the Winnipeg service area must serve 30% of the population within five years and 70% in year 20. In the Dauphin service area, which covers much of my riding, the licensee has seven years to reach just 5% of the population and only 20% of the population in year 20.

Is there anything in the condition of each spectrum licence that requires a telecom company to cover more than the minimum population coverage outlined in the deployment requirement?

4:45 p.m.

Director General, Spectrum Policy Branch, Department of Industry

Matthew Kellison

Thank you for the question.

Mr. Chair, I would say that spectrum deployment requirements vary—

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Mazier Conservative Riding Mountain, MB

I'll take just a yes or no: Is there anything in that?

4:45 p.m.

Director General, Spectrum Policy Branch, Department of Industry

Matthew Kellison

Yes or no, is there anything specific? No, there is not.

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Mazier Conservative Riding Mountain, MB

Wow. Okay.

Mr. Kellison, before finalizing the 3800 megahertz spectrum auction rules, your department consulted on whether deployment requirements should be increased.

The Canadian Federation of Agriculture said that the timelines and coverage percentages were insufficient to ensure service in rural areas. The National Coalition of Chiefs supported deployment within five years. Ecotel warned that deployment timelines beyond 10 years in rural areas become a justification for not providing service. Even Telus proposed putting spectrum to use in every service area within five to seven years, yet Bell and Rogers opposed any acceleration.

Your department decided not to accelerate the spectrum deployment requirements. When farmers, first nations and a major carrier are asking for faster rural deployment requirements, why did the government side with the telecom companies to go slower?

4:50 p.m.

Director General, Spectrum Policy Branch, Department of Industry

Matthew Kellison

Thank you for the question.

What I'd say about setting spectrum deployment requirements is that it is challenging to find an appropriate level that will meet our objectives without compromising the ability for providers to offer service. What I mean by that...and I think it's absolutely true that spectrum requirements have strengthened over time and will continue to get stronger, while also using smaller licence areas that target more specific communities. For example, if you go back 20 or 30 years, you might look at someone getting a national or provincial licence—

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Mazier Conservative Riding Mountain, MB

Yes, but we're not talking—I'm sorry, Mr. Kellison, to cut you off—about 20 or 30 years. This was a spectrum licence that was supposed to enable and connect all of rural Canada with a plan, and calling out 20 years and only 5% of coverage is absolutely ridiculous.

Rural Canadians are very frustrated by this, but I have another question for you. Can you provide this committee—

4:50 p.m.

Director General, Spectrum Policy Branch, Department of Industry

Matthew Kellison

I'd like to finish—

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Mazier Conservative Riding Mountain, MB

I have more questions for you.

Can you provide this committee with a list of all individual licensees who have failed to meet a spectrum deployment requirement of a licence over the last 10 years, broken down by the spectrum type, the tier level, the name of service area and what specific deployment they failed to meet, including by how much? Can you also include details of what specific penalties or consequences, if any, the department gave to them? Can you please table that?

September 24th, 2026 / 4:50 p.m.

Director General, Spectrum Policy Branch, Department of Industry

Matthew Kellison

We can get back to you on that, but I'd be happy to—

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Mazier Conservative Riding Mountain, MB

Mr. Kellison, most of the spectrum the government has auctioned off for 5G use is higher-frequency spectrum that covers less distance than the low-band spectrum the rural areas rely on, and I witness that every day in driving around my riding. Has the department conducted an analysis on what the shift to higher-frequency spectrum means for rural coverage?

4:50 p.m.

Director General, Spectrum Policy Branch, Department of Industry

Matthew Kellison

What I'd say is that the mobile network operators require a range of spectrum to cover large population areas. Certainly, you are correct that low-frequency spectrum like 600 or 700 megahertz is ideal for covering large areas. It does not necessarily offer the kind of data throughput—

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Mazier Conservative Riding Mountain, MB

Has the department conducted an analysis on that?