Industry Committee on March 6th, 2023

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank my fellow Conservative Mr. Mazier for being with us today.

As Mr. Lemire said, people in Quebec are dealing with real challenges when it comes to Internet service, especially those who live in the regions. I can attest to that, myself, with my home Internet. The service speed you get from a provider varies greatly depending on where you live. Personally, I pay about $150 a month, which I think is exorbitant. I don't have a land line at home anymore. All I have is the Internet and a very limited TV package. In other words, the bulk of my bill is for Internet service. I pay for high-speed Internet, but I regularly notice that the speed isn't consistent, and my service provider isn't telling me that. I find out indirectly that the speed I'm getting from my service provider isn't up to par at certain times, when I have trouble downloading simple things like photos.

Basically, thanks to your bill, users would be better informed. You said this, and it's my understanding as well: not all the companies are exactly sold on your bill. I don't know whether that reflects a desire not to be transparent, because they don't want to be forced to provide the information, or whether they feel a bit threatened by the bill.

Have you talked to any telecom carriers in Canada that are examining your bill as we speak?

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

I've talked to them, or they've talked to me about my bill. I guess we'll put it that way. I think they're waiting. I believe they're coming to committee, and I think that's a good question for them.

I don't understand how.... If an Internet service provider is sitting in front of you and is not telling you what kind of service it's offering you, what is that? How can they justify that and sit here and say that's okay?

That isn't acceptable for Canadians. You wonder why people are so mad at the telecom industry. This is actually a very good opportunity for the telecom industry to build some trust, to build those bridges back with—

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment and pretend I'm the CEO of a telecom company. Given the volume of data traffic, it's inevitable that customers at the end of the line, road or street won't have the same speed as customers at the beginning of the line. Take telephone service, for example. Back in the day, seven people could be on the same line. Eventually, the service quality wasn't the same when you got to the end of the circuit. That's the sort of answer you might get from the telecom industry.

Companies sell customers a specific service at a specific price, but the quality of that service actually depends on overall customer demand. What do you make of that?

How do you think the carriers might respond?

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

They have the information. They are reporting this information to the CRTC anyway. All they have to do is tell the consumer. That's all they have to do.

When I first started down this path with this bill, that was the first red flag: “Oh, we can't do this. This is too much information.” It's not too much information. They provide it to the CRTC, and it will vary. Canadians are well aware of that. They know they're not going to get the same type of service or the same speeds in a rural area, but they want some service and they want to know what they're paying for.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

How often should companies be required to provide the information to customers?

Let's say my service provider charges me $100 a month for Internet service, but the service speed varies throughout the month. Should I get a discount at the end of the month to make up for it? Would you go that far?

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

I'll read something from a statement by the chairwoman. They're borrowing from a model for food products:

Going forward, our rules will require that broadband nutrition labels are fully displayed when a consumer is making a purchasing decision. That means consumers will have simple, easy-to-read facts about price, speed, data allowances, and other aspects of high-speed internet service up front. Plus, by requiring that providers display introductory rates clearly, we are seeking to end the kind of unexpected fees and junk costs that can get buried in the long and mind-numbingly confusing statements of terms and conditions.

The U.S. is tackling these types of things. They see how industry can do better, and they're telling them, “Get your act together.”

We need to do the same thing in Canada. It starts with legislation like Bill C-288.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you, Mr. Généreux.

That concludes the question and answer period.

Thank you very much, Mr. Mazier. Congratulations on moving forward with this private member's bill. It's quite an accomplishment for any parliamentarian. We appreciate your being here and answering our questions.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee members.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

On that note, I'll suspend briefly, so that we can continue for the second hour.

Thanks again, Mr. Mazier.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Welcome back, friends and colleagues.

We're now entering the second hour of this meeting, where we are studying Bill C-244, an act to amend the Copyright Act regarding diagnosis, maintenance and repair. As you know, it is due to be reported back to the House on Wednesday.

Given the short time frame, I would seek the consent of the committee to agree to a motion asking for a 30-day delay for us to report back to the House.

Is there unanimous consent for such a motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

It's duly recorded with the clerk.

I recognize Mr. Fillmore.

[Andy Fillmore, Liberal, Halifax, NS]

Thanks very much, Mr. Chair.

I thank our fellow committee members for agreeing to this extension of 30 days. I think it will get us to a better product. Part of that, I think, is having an opportunity to ask some probing questions of the officials from ISED who are here today.

After some discussions with opposition members, I think there's also agreement that we will now go in camera, rather than do clause-by-clause, for the remainder of today's hour and have a chance to have a very good, frank conversation with our officials.

I would move that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

There is a motion to go in camera.

(Motion agreed to)

I will suspend the meeting so we can go in camera.

[Proceedings continue in camera]