Public Safety Committee on June 10th, 2019

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I don't have as many as normal.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Mr. Graham, you have five minutes.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Amos, one of the bases of Quebec's forest fire protection agency—the Société de protection des forêts contre le feu, or SOPFEU—is located in your riding, in Maniwaki. Last weekend, an event was held for aviation enthusiasts, Rendez-vous aérien. It was no doubt great fun. I wish I could've been there.

The SOPFEU has a low-frequency radio service across all of Quebec. It works throughout southern Quebec, at 55° or 56° north latitude. The cell phone service is entirely high-frequency, beginning at 400 MHz and even higher.

Since you've been in Parliament, have any telecommunications companies come to you with creative solutions outside the box? The focus is always on 5G and 24 GHz. You and I will agree that 24 GHz service would be tough to implement. Have any companies ever approached you with creative solutions?

[William Amos, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

I must admit I'm no expert. I'm not aware of any companies providing solutions like that. I agree with what you said and with the premise of your question.

Yesterday, I had a chance to meet some people from the SOPFEU. They put on the Rendez-vous aérien event in Maniwaki, which I was delighted to attend. In the Gatineau valley, these people are heralded as heroes. They are Canadian heroes to us. I have no doubt they'll be present in Alberta and British Columbia this summer, and certainly in Quebec.

Coming back to your question, I wonder what innovative solutions would make it possible to access the various bands of the spectrum. I don't know the answer. It goes back to what Mr. Dubé said about the reason for undertaking a study like this. It can't be assumed that politicians will have the answers to technical questions. We need engineers and entrepreneurs to come up with different options so that, together, we can recommend the most promising and cost-effective solution.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

You and Mr. Dubé were discussing potential witnesses earlier. You mentioned firefighters associations as well as the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, among others.

Should we be looking to telecommunications companies for creative solutions? I'm talking about non-traditional players, outside the Bells and Teluses. Should we study the whole issue of spectrum, as you mentioned, to figure out whether the current system is meeting regional needs?

[William Amos, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Absolutely. Those are all key questions.

Yes, the telecommunications sector is home to a range of minor players. In the Pontiac, for instance, PioneerWireless holds tremendous potential, but it can be harder for small companies to access government programs. They no doubt have some ideas to suggest. I would be grateful to the committee if it were to examine the way telecommunications companies, big and small, view public safety and their role in the solutions process.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

With this Parliament drawing to a close, we are running out of time. It'll basically be over next week.

If you could tell the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security of the 43rd Parliament something, what would it be?

[William Amos, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

I would start by stressing how important the issue is. Then, I would point out the need for a non-partisan approach given that there is unanimous agreement on the problem. In Canada, we do better when we tackle major issues in a non-partisan way. This issue is highly complex. It's way too easy to point fingers, assign blame and get caught up in politics. That's not what the constituents in my riding or rural Canadians, in general, need. Finally, I think it would be very helpful for the committee to recommend that the next Parliament revisit the issue. That would signal the possibility of the next Parliament taking up the issue even though we may not have time to examine it in depth.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Graham.

Mr. Eglinski, go ahead for five minutes, please.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Thank you.

I want to thank the presenter, Mr. Amos, for presenting this. As my counterpart said here, I'm very much in favour of trying to connect this country of ours to have cell coverage.

I notice that part (iii) of the text of your motion says:

(iii) continue to work with telecommunication companies, provinces, territories, municipalities, Indigenous communities and relevant emergency response organizations

That's the part of this that kind of interests me. Most provinces have set up an emergency communications program that interconnects the ambulance service, police service and fire service. That has been in place for many years across most of the country that I'm aware of.

Have you talked to or approached the provincial governments, municipal governments or territorial counterparts to see what part they thought we should play? As I see it, it cannot be done by industry alone. It is not going to give us that connectivity on its own.

Your riding is about the same size as mine, Mr. Amos. I think I have about as much uninhabited land and about the same number of municipalities and counties. I have 11 counties and they're all fighting independently to try to get this service, but it's not profitable for industry. I think there is a need for our counties, our provinces, our federal government and industry to communicate.

I'm wondering if you have had any communications within your area as to where they think we should fit in. It's a big dollar amount. The money you mentioned—the $750 million—is just scratching the surface if we're going to give Canada equal coverage from one end to the other. It's going to be in the billions. Industry has told us that realistically it's probably more like $5 billion to $7 billion to connect Canada.

I wonder if you would comment on that.

[William Amos, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you for your question, and I would like to thank you also for being such a great colleague. We've worked together on the environment committee, and during our trip out west we had the pleasure of enjoying a little portion of your very special and very beautiful riding. I won't forget that.

You've asked about the role of the provincial governments and what my experience has been on that front as we try to amass the funding required to get to a multi-billion dollar solution. I think you're right. I've heard different numbers; I've heard the $15 billion figure bandied about.

Regardless of that, I think one of the things that has changed since our election in 2015 is a willingness of the provinces to engage in a more serious fashion with more serious provincial investments. I can speak for the situation in Quebec, where the connect to innovate program was matched by provincial funds. In the Pontiac, I've had the opportunity to announce over $20 million in new high-speed Internet funding. All of the federal contributions were matched by provincial contributions. I'd say roughly about a bit north of 50% of the total of that $20 million was federal and provincial investments.

I think we're turning a bit of a corner in the sense that despite the fact that the jurisdiction around telecommunications is clearly understood to be federal, there's a recognition that the fiscal responsibility is simply too large for one level of government to bear.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

If I'm hearing you correctly, in that innovation fund, I believe we gave Quebec almost $160 million. So did Quebec also invest $161 million in the last four years?

[William Amos, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

I believe it was at least that. It may even have invested a little more. Perhaps Mr. Graham would have exact figures by memory. I don't have those by memory, but I'm sure I could come back with them.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Do you know if any of your counties have invested? I believe you have a very similar system to what I have back home, where you have a number of large counties. Are they looking at investing? Have you talked to them about that?

[William Amos, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Absolutely. In fact, the riding of Pontiac has three regional municipal governments, each with roughly 15 municipalities within them. Two of those regional municipal governments partnered together and brought a submission forward and submitted it to the connect to innovate program. In the end, their project wasn't the one that was chosen, but it does go to show that this is where the projects are going to be coming from, not just from the major telecommunications companies but also from municipal governments working with small service providers, working with consultants who are advising them. This is one of the challenges that we're looking to help them with.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Ms. Dabrusin, you have five minutes.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Thank you. I'll give my time to Mr. Graham.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Mr. Graham, you have another five minutes.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I'll take it. Yes.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In the past, private companies didn't invest in digital infrastructure without some type of federal, provincial or other source of funding. You just said that Quebec funded a large chunk of the Internet service within its borders. I believe it was much more than 50% of the federal and provincial funding that came from Quebec. The province made a tremendous contribution.

What can be done to get around companies' refusal to invest before they receive government funding? Is the answer to build digital infrastructure that is entirely publicly owned?

[William Amos, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Some companies would certainly argue that nationalizing the infrastructure is the way to go. I don't agree because that would be too costly for taxpayers. Taxpayers would have a very hard time covering the billions upon billions that have already been invested. However, the goal is definitely to prevent situations where investments aren't made unless government funding has been granted.

That said, we all realize how important the issue is. As I said in response to Mr. Eglinski's question, some competition is already happening. Municipal and regional governments, often in partnership with small companies, are competing with the major telecommunications players. I think it's important to ensure the competition is balanced when it comes to regional governments, small players and major companies. Of course, they are all looking for public money, whether it comes from the federal government, the CRTC, the province or some other source.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Under the connect to innovate program, a company receiving federal funding has to provide public access to the system. Might a similar requirement be applied to cell phone service, if the federal or provincial government helped to build towers and the system were more accessible than required by the CRTC? Conversely, would that be even more detrimental to investment?

Telecommunications companies such as Bell, Rogers and Telus have said setting up towers isn't worthwhile because a company that doesn't have a tower jumps onto their network right away.

What is the right balance between open access and a monopoly on investment?

[William Amos, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

That's a highly complex issue that the CRTC is looking into. As a politician and someone who is by no means an expert, I'm hesitant to say how the commission should go about finding that balance. Technical and economic considerations are equally important in coming up with the answer. A balance is clearly needed. Canadians benefit from greater competition, but, at the same time, companies need incentives to invest in fixed infrastructure, in other words, towers and fibre optics.

Our government is trying to find that balance with a directive that encourages companies to lower prices. It is asking the CRTC to move in that direction, but it has to provide incentives, whether through the connect to innovate program or other initiatives. Incentives are needed to give the private sector a reason to invest capital in infrastructure.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Graham.

Mr. Amos, if I wanted to digitally disappear, would I move to Pontiac?

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

Yes, we can arrange that in Ottawa.