Transport Committee on April 20th, 2021

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

I'll continue with a theme you started with in your opening remarks, Mr. Field. That was collaboration among all three levels of government.

I was on television in Alberta today regarding the new day care announcement in the budget. I'm not certain how that's going to succeed because from what I've from transport projects, for example, is that the provinces are blaming the federal government and the federal government is blaming the provinces.

What do you think needs to happen in terms of collaboration at all three levels for success?

[Barry Field]

Yes, I think it makes a whole lot of sense for the federal government to providing funding via a transfer payment to provinces and territories, but much like other infrastructure projects, let the provinces then figure out how to implement those solutions, working with the municipalities, of course. I think regional and local input to those programs and projects is important. I'm convinced that the further you get away from the municipality in the governmental hierarchy, you lose the plot a little. You don't have the local knowledge; you don't have the local flavour.

In an ideal world I'd like to see all of the funds out there transferred to the provinces and territories and have the responsibility sit with the provinces and territories as to how they implement and how to resolve the problem.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

I don't think we've ever seen more examples of this than during the pandemic with health care transfers, long-term care facilities, etc., so I think your recommendation is very well taken.

Can you give an example where we've seen this positive type of collaboration before? We've talked about how it should be. You've talked about how you think it should be done. Is there any jurisdiction that comes to mind where you've seen this done successfully?

[Barry Field]

Yes. Certainly. The SWIFT program is an example of that. SWIFT is funded from transfer payments through Infrastructure Canada to the Province of Ontario. They have signed a contribution agreement with SWIFT, and we work directly with the Province of Ontario to implement this program. I think it works very well. It's very effective and it eliminates that duplication.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Do you think it's feasible for these groups to be able to coordinate that? We have been waiting on the delivery of high-speed Internet for rural Canadians for a very long time.

With all levels of government, you would think that the federal government in particular would have figured out how to achieve this.

Do you think it's possible to achieve this?

[Barry Field]

Yes, absolutely, I think it's possible.

As I mentioned in my remarks, the provincial government has put a substantial amount of money into this in Ontario, most recently with an additional $2.8 billion on top of the billion dollars that was already there. The federal government has just added another billion dollars to its universal broadband fund.

I think the political will is there. I think the finances are finally starting to materialize. Like most things, the devil is in the details. It will be really interesting to see how these programs are implemented and administered.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Mr. Field, and Ms. Kusie.

We're now going to move on to—

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to Mr. Field and the other witnesses.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you.

We're now going to move on to the Liberals, with Mr. El-Khoury for five minutes.

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome to the witnesses.

My first question is for Mr. Field and has two or three parts.

I understand the need for a more coordinated approach, but we have also heard that there is no one-size-fits-all solution for a country as geographically vast and unique as Canada. Looking at all the projects and investments under way, I understand where the comment comes from.

The list is long. The Canada Infrastructure Bank will invest $3 billion. The universal broadband fund will provide $1.75 billion over 10 years. A total of $600 million will support low-earth orbit satellite capacity. The connect to innovate program will invest $585 million. The CRTC's broadband fund will invest $750 million. Broadband projects are eligible under the rural and northern communities infrastructure funding stream of the investing in Canada plan—$350 million to date—as well as under the first nation infrastructure fund—$50 million to date.

That's a lot of programs. What can you tell us about that?

I believe Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada coordinated its efforts with federal, provincial and municipal partners to make sure the funding is allocated appropriately, to avoid duplication.

Is it not better to have multiple programs and investments that target a wide range of solutions to make sure no Canadian is left behind?

With a range of programs, are there not more opportunities to apply for project funding?

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Mr. El-Khoury, whom are you directing that question to?

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

I said it at the beginning it was to Mr. Field.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Mr. El-Khoury.

Go ahead, Mr. Field.

[Barry Field]

Thank you for that.

As you've mentioned, there are a number of programs out there. Again, many of the programs you've mentioned are being administered by different organizations, many of them through ISED. I do concur with you on that.

Again, in addition to those programs, there are provincial programs and municipally led programs, and again, almost competing with each other. I use the word “competing” in a positive way, but in many aspects they are competing with each other to solve the same problem. I think that by co-ordinating those efforts, and by collecting the funding at the provincial and the regional level, there is a better opportunity to solve this issue in a more co-ordinated way.

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

My second question is for Mr. Péladeau or Mr. Pruneau.

Can you explain why the government's decision to stop using the hexagon model was seen as such a positive step in assessing underserved communities and households?

[Pierre Karl Péladeau]

Mr. El-Khoury, I'm not sure what you're referring to, so you'll have to tell me more about the hexagon model.

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

The hexagon model means there are a number of steps.

[Pierre Karl Péladeau]

I'm conferring with my colleague, but unfortunately we don't have the answer. It's a highly technical question. I will have to get back to you.

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Is there another witness who can answer that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Mr. Hampton?

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Very well. I'll move on to another question.

Mr. Péladeau, the federal and Quebec governments just announced an almost historic investment in high-speed Internet connectivity.

What impact do you think the initiative will have on the day-to-day lives of Quebeckers? What will it do for businesses, schools and communications in Quebec?

Some communities have long been trying to obtain this service. What will this initiative mean for them?

[Pierre Karl Péladeau]

The first thing I will say is that Quebeckers have been able to enjoy that type of service for the past 20 years. The 2000s marked the transition from telephone-based Internet access towards cable-based access. The switch was from copper wire to coaxial cable, and then to fibre optic cable.

Those advances were closely tied to increased productivity and innovation among Quebec's businesses. Going forward, it was possible to download entertainment content and access all kinds of other services that are now available. That was all thanks to significant investments by telecommunications companies, especially Videotron and Cogeco. I think I can speak for our counterparts at Cogeco, since they service other areas as well. The result was that Quebeckers were able to enjoy the benefits of an environment that had previously been dominated by the long-standing monopoly Bell—a very good thing, indeed.

The second thing I want to say is that all of those efforts created an environment that fuelled innovation and development from a customer service standpoint. That is quite significant. Of course, Quebeckers want access to an affordable telecommunications network—and they can have that thanks to competition—but they also want access to innovative services, so the service offering was expanded.

Quebec has a rich culture, so we were able to create and offer services like Club illico, a Netflix-like service that showcases Quebec's vibrant cultural, television and radio talent.

Finally, I will say that all of those efforts have benefited Quebeckers and will continue to benefit them, because competition is always preferable, a win-win for Quebeckers and Canadians.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Mr. Péladeau and Mr. El-Khoury.

I'm now going to move on to Mr. Barsalou-Duval for two and a half minutes.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It is often argued that telecommunications services cost as much as they do because of the country's size. However, a competition bureau submission to the CRTC reveals that the big three—Bell, Telus and Rogers—enjoy extremely high levels of profitability, even higher than other places in the world. As compared with the rest of Canada, Quebec has much lower Internet prices.

Can you tell us why that is, Mr. Péladeau?

[Pierre Karl Péladeau]

I would tie profitability to investment, of course.

A number of factors determine profitability, the first being operating income—the ability to generate revenue. A big chunk of a company's profits are reinvested, and yes, because of the country's size, those investments will have to be greater. It's important to recognize that fact. It is the reason why it has taken so long to provide service in rural and remote areas. Those investments were made much sooner in urban areas because they are so densely populated. In the face of those facts, initiatives like the one that was just announced are necessary.

To reach the goal of connectivity for all residents, and perhaps to address socio-economic challenges, the Quebec government and the Government of Canada joined forces on a program to work with telecommunications companies to deliver high-speed Internet access to Quebeckers.

That will require more significant investment given how big the area is. In addition, staying on top of the latest advancements in technology is an ongoing factor. That is key. We have seen it during the pandemic. Thanks to the strong networks we built, people have been able to work remotely, as we are doing now. That's a good example. Goodness knows, with so many people working from home, the network load has increased significantly, but our networks have not failed at a time when we needed them most. The current strength of our networks is the result of investments that were made in the past, which are now proving their value.