Why Not a Metered Internet?

The headline of the Globe and Mail article asks the question, Why Not a Metered Internet?

The argument that follows defends the big telecoms in terms of market forces: for example, the cost of infrastructure building.

Here's a different answer to the question: with a metered Internet we would have another case of them that haves and them that don't.

We already have a growing economic inequality gap. With Internet metering, we would have an associated inequality gap in terms of fundamental communications access.

An inequality gap already exists with respect to telephony. The lowest income households haven't room in their budgets to acquire that all-important telephone number. They've not a telephone or cell phone or other mobile device to which such a number could be attached. For those households that have a desktop computer with Skype installed, they cannot make full use of the VOIP provider's services or those offered by similar providers. Such services would provide them with an online number (just like a phone number), thus allowing them to receive incoming telephone calls to their computer.

Why can customers in Canada - unlike those in most of the developed world - not obtain online numbers?

Again, a CRTC decision lies at the heart of the matter.

Access to incoming phone calls. Access to the full services the Internet can provide. In both cases, it's about communication with one's friends, family and community; access to one's regional district, provincial or territorial government and services; access to the federal government and services; access to information regarding elections, parties and candidates; access to news and information.... It's about access to democracy.

[Cross-posted at economicus ridiculous]

Recommend this post

CRTC, UBB and a Response from my MP

Am glad the CRTC has been ordered to review (read: 'reverse') its decision on usage-based Internet billing. But I won't be happy until the CRTC has gone the way of the dinosaurs, just like the dinosaurs its morphed mandate has been so busy protecting.

That aside, I wanted to share this great letter I received from my MP, NDP Jean Crowder, written in response to my terse email regarding the CRTC's UBB decision:

Thank you for writing to me about the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) decision to allow usage based Internet billing. Put simply, this issue has been brewing for a long time. Canadians are paying more and more for less and less service.

The New Democrats have been pushing for the last number of years for a coherent digital innovation policy. The government has preferred to let the "market" make the decisions about access, speed and pricing for internet use. The problem is that we don't have an open, competitive market. We have a small oligarchy of vertically-integrated companies that control virtually every aspect of consumer-media use. The opportunities for price gouging and anti-competitive practices are obvious.

We welcome the Industry Minister's sudden change of heart on usage-based internet billing. As my colleague, Charlie Angus pointed out in the House of Commons, "Canada used to be a world leader in terms of internet access and speed. Under this government, we've fallen behind. If the CRTC's decision on usage-based billing is not overturned, Canada is in danger of becoming a digital backwater."

While the Minister of Industry has said he will review the usage-based billing decision, more action is needed to protect consumers who are already being hit with capped internet service. The large internet service providers and broadcast entities restrict competition by limiting access to their networks - not only to internet users but to their competitors as well.

I appreciate you taking the time let your views be known. It helps me in my work as a Member of Parliament. The New Democratic Party will continue to push for better access and digital rights for Canadians.

Sincerely,
Jean Crowder, MP Nanaimo-Cowichan
101-126 Ingram St., Duncan, BC, V9L 1P1
www.jeancrowder.ca

Recommend this post

Of Decades Past and Future

As 2010 comes to a close, my hope for the coming decade is for an overhauled Canadian Parliament and similar changes to the BC Legislative Assembly. I doubt anything substantive will change in terms of policy or direction - for this country, this province or its communities - if these changes do not happen.

I hope for the people's representatives to be elected through a new inclusive electoral system; that the powers of back-benchers be returned; that the power in the office of the heads of governments be vastly reduced; and that Question Period, a farce today, be returned to a venue for vital rigourous debate on issues important to Canadians.

I hope for a reversal of the power and responsibilities of Canada’s three tiers of government. Local governments must have more power, greater areas of responsibility and additional means for acquiring their own, direct, revenue. Many Canadians appear, rightly, to have had enough of the paternalism of the federal and provincial governments toward municipalities; the governments closest to the people are those that should have the greatest political power to effect change.

Of the years 2001 through 2010, they constituted the most miserable and worst decade for me personally. The misery was lessened, however, through new friends and learning that this community truly was a ‘community’ in the old-fashioned sense. My rapidly-acquired and subsequently persisting straitened circumstances also came with a silver lining. They forced a reassessment of my values and shoved the activist in me out of the closet. Had my personal circumstances not been so bad I may never have opened my eyes to the distress around me or become such a strong proponent and activist for democratic (and housing) reform.

Recommend this post