ARCHIVED - Transcript, Hearing April 15, 2016

Volume: 5
Location: Gatineau, Quebec
Date: April 15, 2016
© Copyright Reserved

Attendees and Location

Held at:

Outaouais Room
Conference Centre
140 Promenade du Portage
Gatineau, Québec

Attendees:

• Chairman: Jean-Pierre Blais
  
• Members: Candice Molnar, Peter Menzies, Linda Vennard, Christopher MacDonald
  
• Legal Counsel: Emilia de Somma, Amy Hamley
  
• Secretary: Jade Roy
  
• Hearing Managers: John Macri, Christine Bailey, Sarah O’Brian
  

Transcript

Gatineau, Québec

--- Upon resuming on Friday, April 15, 2016 at 1:02 p.m.

6137 LE PRÉSIDENT: Alors, s'il vous plaît.

6138 Madame la secrétaire?

6139 LA SECRÉTAIRE: Merci.

6140 Nous débuterons avec la présentation député de Mégantic-L’Érable.

6141 S'il vous plaît, vous présenter et présenter vos collègues, et vous avez 10 minutes pour votre présentation.

PRESENTATION

6142 M. BERTHOLD: Merci beaucoup. Merci beaucoup, Monsieur le président, Mesdames les commissaires, Messieurs les commissaires. Merci beaucoup de nous recevoir aujourd’hui.

6143 C'est un grand honneur pour nous d’avoir la chance de venir exprimer la voix de notre comté et des différents coins de notre comté devant le CRTC, devant cet important dossier, puis je vous remercie d’avoir tenu cette consultation publique. Je pense qu’il y a beaucoup de gens qui sont venus s’exprimer puis vous allez entendre encore de beaux propos aujourd’hui.

6144 Avec moi, j’ai la chance d'être entouré des préfets des trois municipalités régionales de comté, des trois MRC de ma circonscription. C'est une grande circonscription avec une cinquantaine de municipalités.

6145 J’ai madame Marielle Fecteau qui est la préfète de la MRC du Granit. Monsieur Paul Vachon qui est le préfet de la MRC des Appalaches, et monsieur Sylvain Labrecque qui est le préfet de la MRC de l’Érable. Ils sont accompagnés de leurs directeurs généraux qui sont là pour les appuyer dans la présentation.

6146 Donc, encore une fois, merci de nous entendre aujourd’hui. Je remercie les trois préfets qui ont accepté de participer également à cette importante audience publique.

6147 Vous savez, ils vont vous présenter aujourd’hui leurs visions des problèmes relatifs au débit du numérique et des enjeux de l’absence d’un débit convenable dans l’ensemble des municipalités de la circonscription.

6148 Plutôt que de me faire leur porte-parole et d'être seul, j’ai préféré qu’ils viennent vous expliquer par eux-mêmes la situation qu’ils vivent parce qu’ils ont eu l’occasion de travailler avec les différents programmes qui ont été mis en place dans le passé. Ils vont pouvoir vous dire les avantages, les inconvénients, ce qu’ils ont vécu comme problèmes et les résultats qu’on vit aujourd’hui réellement sur le terrain, les différentes tentatives qu’on a eues pour couvrir l’ensemble des trois MRC.

6149 L’internet, vous le savez, c'est pour ça que vous tenez ces audiences-là aujourd’hui, c'est un service qui est essentiel et, selon moi, c'est un service qui est tellement essentiel qu’il doit être considéré aujourd’hui au même titre que l’électricité.

6150 Si on se rappelle quand on a électrifié les campagnes, au début, pas tout le monde qui était d’accord, mais aujourd'hui tout le monde a l’électricité. C'est normal mais internet aujourd’hui, ben on en est rendu à un besoin aussi important pour nos communautés rurales, Monsieur le président.

6151 La qualité des services, on est notamment desservis beaucoup par les services satellites. Malheureusement, c'est pas la qualité que les gens doivent s’attendre. On a eu -- et ça ils auront l’occasion de vous en parler mais je voulais absolument prendre deux minutes pour vous le dire parce qu’on a beaucoup de commentaires très négatifs par rapport à la couverture par satellite.

6152 Donc nos leaders sont sensibilisés, préparés, mais également mobilisés pour offrir un service décent à la population et, de ce pas, je vais leur céder la parole, tout d’abord au préfet de la MRC de l’Érable, monsieur Sylvain Labrecque.

6153 M. LABRECQUE: Merci. Moi pour commencer, je vais vous dresser un portrait de ma MRC. On est 11 municipalités sur 1,290 kilomètres carrés. Y a 23,511 habitants. Cela représente 18 personnes par kilomètre carré. La décroissance démographique est importante chez nous. Y a moins de 2,000 personnes en 20 ans qui ont quitté notre territoire.

6154 C'est un territoire qui est à 96 pour cent agricole. Les Appalaches et la plaine du Saint-Laurent font partie de notre région. On compte 180 entreprises manufacturières et 650 fermes.

6155 Je vais suivre avec le portrait de la couverture internet haute vitesse.

6156 Soixante-et-onze (71) pour cent de ma population de la MRC a accès à internet haute vitesse, en incluant les deux villes urbaines. Seulement 43 pour cent de la population rurale de la MRC a accès à internet haute vitesse, dont neuf municipalités sur 11, soit par fibre, micro-onde et satellite. Plus du tiers de la population, soit 7,160 personnes, n’ont pas accès à internet haute vitesse sur notre territoire.

6157 Quand on parle des Appalaches, on parle aussi d’une desserte qui est difficile. La densité de la population est trop faible pour rentabiliser un projet commercial.

6158 Les enjeux d’internet haute vitesse, mais premièrement je pense qu’internet haute vitesse est un service essentiel de nos jours. Y a capacité d’attraction du territoire qui en est réduite. Chez nous, on vise à attirer 1,000 personnes dans la MRC d’ici 2020. L’entreprenariat en milieu rural est presque impossible.

6159 Le partage des tours de communications entre les compagnies est très difficile. Cela force les municipalités aussi à investir dans le déploiement de la fibre. C'est quoi leur rôle là-dedans? Les municipalités, nous ne sommes pas des télécommunicateurs. Ça peut occasionner des problèmes juridiques.

6160 La grande difficulté d’obtenir les autorisations des télécommunicateurs pour la location d'espace dans les poteaux par rapport aux coûts est la lenteur du processus.

6161 Merci.

6162 M. BERTHOLD: Merci beaucoup, Monsieur Labrecque.

6163 Madame Marielle Fecteau, préfet de la MRC du Granit va poursuivre.

6164 Mme FECTEAU: Oui, bonjour. La MRC du Granit et des régions rurales du Canada s’entend pour dire que l’accès à une connexion internet large bande est un outil essentiel, indispensable pour le développement et le maintien de nos communautés et de nos entreprises industrielles, commerciales, agricoles et acéricoles.

6165 Je confirme que tous les plans de développement de mes 20 municipalités identifient internet large bande et la couverture cellulaire comme une des trois priorités qui va permettre d’assurer une place dans la compétition à ma région.

6166 Depuis 2004, la MRC du Granit est active dans ce dossier. Nous avons participé aux appels de projets lancés dans le cadre du programme Large Bande: milieu rural branché.

6167 Le financement du programme de développement a été accordé à Xplornet au détriment de quatre coopératives de notre territoire. Nous avons été très déçus car internet satellite ne permet pas la vitesse compétitive.

6168 De plus, les coûts au service ne sont pas compétitifs. Pour Xplornet avec une vitesse de 10 mégabits, ça coûte 89.99$ pour nos citoyens, alors qu’un service de Câble Axion -- c'est un télécommunicateur non dominant -- offre une capacité trois fois plus élevée, soit 30 mégabits, pour un coût de 54.95.

6169 J’ajouterais que les grandes compagnies de ce monde offrent très peu de services dans nos milieux ruraux. L’écart entre la qualité des services internet offerts en milieu urbain comparé à la qualité offerte en milieu rural ne fait que s’accentuer.

6170 La couverture cellulaire est aussi un enjeu majeur dans notre région. Encore une fois, les citoyens, les visiteurs, les touristes s’attendent à avoir une couverture complète et efficace entre téléphonies en 2016. Dans la MRC du Granit, six camps villageois n’ont toujours pas accès à la téléphonie cellulaire.

6171 M. BERTHOLD: Merci beaucoup, Madame Fecteau. Je suis obligé d’être un peu le gardien du temps. On va avoir l’occasion peut-être de continuer à répondre aux questions. J’aimerais que monsieur Paul Vachon puisse conclure du côté de représentations.

6172 M. VACHON: Alors, bonjour. Je vais vous parler de la MRC des Appalaches mais seulement une partie. On est 19 municipalités. Je vais vous parler de la partie qui est en montagne, 13 municipalités, qui a des problèmes. Les autres en ont moins.

6173 Pourquoi internet de base ne répond plus à ce qu’il pouvait offrir auparavant? C'est tout simplement, selon nous, que la valeur des propriétés pour les municipalités n’est pas la même.

6174 Invariablement, lorsque les gens viennent pour acheter une propriété dans nos régions, la première question qui nous est posée, « Avez-vous internet? Avez-vous la téléphonie cellulaire? » Et lorsqu’on leur répond qu’il y a des zones mortes ou qu’on a un internet de base, ben habituellement les transactions ne se font pas.

6175 Le travailleur autonome également. On n’a plus d’attrait en campagne pour être capable aller chercher des gens qui pourraient faire du télétravail ou un travail autonome parce qu’on ne répond pas adéquatement aux besoins que les gens pourraient avoir et finalement je vous dirais le commerce mondial.

6176 Aujourd’hui, qu’on habite une grande ville ou en campagne, lorsqu’on a l’autoroute informatique adéquate bien on a accès à la clientèle du monde entier. Ce n’est pas le cas, pour nous autres ça prend un temps fou.

6177 Alors c’est les raisons pour lesquelles l’internet de base ne correspond pas.

6178 Pour ma part il semble qu’on pourrait avoir une solution. Cette solution-là, comme maire et comme préfet, on la vie dans d’autres organisations.

6179 Le partenariat par exemple qu’on a au niveau municipal avec le fédéral, où on a le partage des ressources, nous permet d’être capable de faire des choses.

6180 Alors une municipalité, une petite municipalité, ne peut pas déployer la fibre optique, c’est des coûts qui dépassent nos capacités.

6181 Cependant, si on avait un partenariat avec le fédéral, le provincial, le municipal bien sûr et l’entreprise privée, qui va y trouver son compte, là tout devient possible et on n’a pas des citoyens de seconde zone.

6182 Finalement on m’a dit que les audiences étaient publiques. Alors le pire, le plus terrible, c’est que nos citoyens ne nous verrons pas. On n’a pas accès. Merci.

--- (LAUGHTER)

6183 LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci.

6184 M. BERTHOLD: Merci, Monsieur Vachon.

6185 Puis en quelques mots, dans le fond notre intervention aujourd’hui c’est qu’on souhaite que quelqu’un puisse ordonner mieux les -- la finalisation de -- du réseau large bande partout au Canada.

6186 Et si on laisse ça aux entreprises, aux municipalités, sans lignes directrices, sans lignes claires, sans une politique qui pourrait être établie par le CRTC, de la manière de le faire, de mettre tout le monde ensemble pour le faire, bien on ne croit pas que ça va être possible, parce qu’on l’a vécu à plusieurs occasions dans le passé.

6187 L’argent ce n’est pas assez. La bonne volonté ce n’est pas assez. Les municipalités ce n’est pas assez, puis les grandes compagnies ne sont pas intéressées.

6188 Donc il faut trouver une solution à cette problématique là, puis c’est pour ça qu’on a saisie l’occasion.

6189 Puis je remercie mes préfets d’avoir fait un travail extraordinaire pour raccourcir leur temps pour être capable de passer notre message en 10 minutes.

6190 Voilà, Monsieur le président, ce qu’on avait à vous dire aujourd’hui.

6191 LE PRÉSIDENT: Excellent et puis on va avoir la chance de continuer à s’entretenir, donc si vous avez des messages supplémentaires à faire passer c’est --

--- (LAUGHTER)

6192 LE PRÉSIDENT: -- il y aura l’occasion. D’ailleurs, je voulais vous remercier de participer parce que je sais que plusieurs d’entre vous ont du voyager une certaine distance pour se rendre et puis c’est important.

6193 Et comme j’ai dit à vos collègues du parlement, même si parfois ce n’est pas très loin on ne vous voit pas souvent devant nos audiences.

6194 Et pourtant ça serait tellement plus efficace si vous vous venez -- veniez nous voir avant les décisions plutôt qu’après, parce qu’à ce moment-là il est un peu tard et donc merci tous d’être là.

6195 Bien peut-être ma première question va être à Madame Fecteau. Est-ce que vous vouliez ajouter quelque chose --

6196 Mme FECTEAU: Oui, je ---

6197 LE PRÉSIDENT: -- à vos propos, parce que j’ai eu l’impression que vous aviez quelques autres commentaires à faire valoir.

6198 Mme FECTEAU: Bien moi je veux aussi vous parler de la couverture cellulaire au niveau des enjeux de sécurité.

6199 Parce que vous savez avec l’évènement qu’on a vécu à Lac-Mégantic en juillet 2013-là, on s’est rendu compte que c’était essentiel, parce que quand on vit des choses comme ça je pense que d’avoir des services cellulaires c’est très important quand on est comme nous sans moyen-là pour quelques jours.

6200 Je pense qu’il faut absolument qu’on soit desservie.

6201 LE PRÉSIDENT: D’accord.

6202 Donc je vais avoir des questions, puis vous pouvez décider de répondre dans l’ordre que vous voulez. Je ne sais pas si vous vous êtes convenus qui va jouer le rôle de quart arrière pour les questions ou peut-être que vous pourriez, Monsieur?

6203 M. BERTHOLD: Oui, écoutez, étant donné qu’on a fait une belle consultation ensemble je pourrais effectivement aider à diriger-là.

6204 LE PRÉSIDENT: Et donc si -- on va présumer que si vous êtes d’accord avec la réponse de votre collègue on va présumer que c’est votre réponse collective.

6205 M. BERTHOLD: Oui.

6206 LE PRÉSIDENT: Et puis si pour une raison quelconque, en raison de la spécificité de votre territoire, que ce n’est pas pertinent bien laissez-nous savoir puis on va faire la différence.

6207 Mais je vais présumer que il y aura -- je présume qu’il y a plus d’alignement que de manque d’alignement.

6208 M. BERTHOLD: Tout à fait.

6209 LE PRÉSIDENT: En approchant l’enjeu de cette façon.

6210 Premièrement je constate que vos préoccupations ne se limitent pas seulement au service à votre -- aux résidents, aux individus, mais vous avez aussi des préoccupations par rapport au -- à des enjeux économiques, développement des affaires et donc le service affaire, qui fait partie de la -- des services de télécommunication et aussi institutionnel.

6211 Par institutionnel je parle hôpitaux, les écoles, et cetera, là dans ce genre-là. Est-ce que c’est vraiment vos préoccupations s’alignent dans tous les cas, dans ces trois tranches d’activités?

6212 M. BERTHOLD: Bien je pense que oui. Oui, Monsieur le président, vous avez tout à fait raison, parce que il n’y a pas que le résidentiel.

6213 Vous savez aujourd’hui avec l’ouverture des marchés sur la scène mondiale, on tente par tous les moyens d’être capable de créer des emplois dans nos régions. C’est très, très, très difficile.

6214 Donc un, pour les travailleurs, pour attirer des travailleurs il faut être capable de leur donner un environnement aussi compétitif que la grande ville.

6215 Donc on tente -- puis peut-être que Madame Fecteau pourra en parler, mais on tente d’attirer des gens de l’extérieur, mais si ils viennent en région puis qu’il n’y a pas internet --

6216 LE PRÉSIDENT: M’hm.

6217 M. BERTHOLD: -- les téléphones ne fonctionnent pas, ils restent une semaine puis ils repartent là. C’est -- les gens sont habituez maintenant d’avoir ça.

6218 D’un autre côté les entreprises aujourd’hui sont toutes branchées. Donc si on veut attirer -- une entreprise veut prendre de l’expansion, puis si elle n’a pas accès à une vitesse convenable bien encore une fois on vient de perdre -- ils vont faire de l’expansion ailleurs, puis ça on l’a vécue dans chacune de nos municipalités.

6219 Côté institutionnel c’est moins important, quoi que c’est un problème. Pourquoi c’est moins important?

6220 Parce que les institutions sont dans les grands centres. Ils sont localisés exemple à Thetford Mines, ils sont localisés à Lac-Mégantic, ils sont localisés à Plessisville, Princeville où il y a effectivement un accès à la large bande.

6221 Donc c’est moins institutionnel que pour les petites municipalités qui veulent se développer, mais peut-être Madame Fecteau pourrait parler des difficultés d’attirer des travailleurs en région-là? Ça les amène à faire des miracles.

6222 Mme FECTEAU: Oui, parce qu’on vit ce problème-là dans nos régions. On veut que les gens viennent s’installer chez nous pour y vivre et surtout pour y travailler.

6223 Dans un premier, parce que nos entreprises manquent de travailleurs et c’est sûr que c’est les premières questions qu’ils nous posent.

6224 Et quand on fait des entrevues pour avoir des spécialistes, c’est aussi important pour eux. C’est très important pour eux que les services internet et téléphonie soient là.

6225 Parce que ils sont habitués à faire -- de vivre avec ça et leur travail il faut qu’ils aient internet pour leur travail, donc je pense c’est important de prendre ça en compte.

6226 Il y a une autre chose, tous nos producteurs acéricole et agricole maintenant c’est comme ça que ça fonctionne, parce qu’on sait que nous dans nos -- dans notre région il y a beaucoup de producteurs acéricoles et ces gens-là c’est devenus des grandes entreprises qui font vivre plusieurs travailleurs, donc eux ont besoin d’internet pour faire fonctionner leurs entreprises.

6227 Donc il ne faut pas oublier ces gens-là, mais ces gens là on ne pourra pas les déménager dans les villes; hein? Parce qu’il faut qu’ils restent dans leurs érablières. Fait que je pense que ça c’est important de situer ça là.

--- (LAUGHTER)

6228 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui, on ne peut pas déplacer les mines non plus, puis les ressources naturelles en général.

6229 Mme FECTEAU: Non, je pense que ça ne pourra pas fonctionner ça.

6230 LE PRÉSIDENT: Il y avait -- il y avait Monsieur Labrecque qui voulait ajouter aussi quelque chose.

6231 M. BERTHOLD: C’est Monsieur Lavergne qui (inaudible).

6232 M. LABRECQUE: Peut-être un petit complément pour bien distinguer les réseaux publics. Vous donnez un exemple, on est obligé de se construire un réseau privé à même les municipalités, mais ce qui nous a forcés à signer des clauses de non-concurrence avec l’entreprise qui est -- qui était partenaire avec nous.

6233 Ça veut dire que moi mon réseau de fibre optique rentre dans tous les villages, mais je n’ai pas le droit de desservir la population, parce que c’est le contrat que j’ai avec une entreprise privée.

6234 Donc toutes les institutions ce sont construites des réseaux privés, mais en circuit fermés à cause des partenariats avec l’entreprise privée, qui ne permettent pas de diversifier le résultat.

6235 Et pour terminer bien c’est sûr que l’entreprenariat manufacturier, les -- c’est une question de capacité de large bande, parce que souvent on a à coter des pièces en 3D pour un fabriquant ou on fait du télé -- de la téléconférence avec une filiale étrangère. C’est vraiment problématique là.

6236 Ils sont quasiment obliger d’envoyer leurs dessins techniques la nuit-là.

6237 LE PRÉSIDENT: Je comprends.

6238 Est-ce que -- et je –- si vous n’en avez pas ça va, mais si jamais vous en avez fait des sondages de -- par exemple des compagnies qui ont décidé -- je vous crois là sur parole avec les -- ce que vous dites-là, mais est-ce qu’il y a une -- il y a eu des sondages ou des analyses de marchés plus formels où il y a des entreprises qui ont décidé de ne pas s’installer, ou des chiffres plus précis que vous avez demandé à une tierce partie de mener, ou des sondage de gens qui ont quitté vos régions, des individus qui ont quitté vos régions, qui pourraient démontrer d’une façon plus objective les raisons pour leur départ?

6239 Et est-ce que c’était des -- si vous n’en n’avez pas ça va, mais je me demandais si vous -- vous avez ce genre de preuve?

6240 M. BERTHOLD: Il n’existe probablement pas -- parce quand la population part malheureusement on ---

6241 LE PRÉSIDENT: C’est dur de les sonder, oui. Ça c’est vrai, oui.

6242 M. BERTHOLD: C’est dur de les sonder, puis on a de la difficulté à avoir les raisons.

6243 Quand on sait -- on sait quand dans certains petits villages qui -- tous les efforts qu’ils mettent pour attirer des gens, puis il n’a pas malheureusement -- ils ne tiennent pas les statistiques de gens quand ils arrivent.

6244 Mais le téléphone est là puis la personne visite une maison, puis il regarde son téléphone, il n’a pas de signal, la maison n’est pas vendue.

6245 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui, o.k.

6246 M. BERTHOLD: Mais il n’y a pas de statistique comme ça qui existe.

6247 LE PRÉSIDENT: Ça va.

6248 M. BERTHOLD: Mais l’autre chose par exemple qu’on pourrait dire, c’est qu’on a eu une rencontre dans la (inaudible) avec les petits distributeurs, Câble Axion, Sogetel, qui nous parlaient d’un chiffre très, très simple. Ils sont prêts à investir 1,000$ par porte, puis si ça coûte plus cher, faut que la communauté paye. C'est à peu près ce qu’on a eu comme information. Donc eux, leur barème d’investissement c'est 1,000$.

6249 LE PRÉSIDENT: Dans votre région en raison de la densité ou en moyenne?

6250 M. BERTHOLD: En général dans le marché, ils disent nous on est prêt à mettre -- pour chaque client, on estime que la rentabilité puis le retour sur l’investissement, on peut pas investir plus que 1,000$ pour brancher une résidence.

6251 Donc si ça en coûte 3,000 en raison de l’éloignement, en raison qu’y a une maison à tous les trois kilomètres parce qu’on est dans un rang, ben évidemment que si ça coûte 4,000$ par porte, ben on va demander aux municipalités de fournir la différence. Et ça c'est clairement établi. C'est des propositions qui ont été faites à chacune des municipalités qui sont autour de moi.

6252 Donc ça laisse des municipalités qui veulent se prendre en main. Elles ont pas le choix. Elles sont forcées d'investir et jamais il est prévu de retour sur l’investissement pour les municipalités-là. Une fois que tout est payé là, les municipalités peuvent pas avoir une participation au fameux rendement-là dont parlent les compagnies-là.

6253 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui, mais si vous attirez des entreprises puis des résidents, votre -- les impôts fonciers peuvent se maintenir ou même augmenter.

6254 M. BERTHOLD: C'est pour ça qu’ils le font.

6255 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui. Donc ç'a un impact sur votre fiscalité.

6256 M. BERTHOLD: Oui.

6257 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui.

6258 M. VACHON: Si vous me permettez?

6259 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui, je vous en prie.

6260 Oh, y a trop de micros là. Je pense qu’on a une capacité même ici de trois micros en même temps.

6261 M. VACHON: On a un exemple chez nous. Bell Canada est en train d’acheter une tour, une ancienne tour de communication d’Hydro-Québec pour desservir une partie de la plaine du Saint-Laurent parce qu’ils sont en hauteur.

6262 Le village est situé à un kilomètre de cette tour-là mais dans une dépression. Donc on n’a pas accès même s’il y a une proximité.

6263 Bell est prêt à nous aider et la municipalité est prête à investir. Ça va coûter autour de 100,000$ pour booster le signal. Cependant, ce qui nous inquiète c'est de rester avec des technologies dépassées. Ça va permettre d’avoir accès minimalement mais on reste avec des technologies dépassées, alors que si on pouvait créer un partenariat avec l’entreprise privée puis les différents paliers de gouvernement, y compris les municipalités, on pourrait aller vers des technologies qui seraient disponibles puis qui seraient au moins au même niveau que tout le monde.

6264 Et ainsi, à la question que vous avez posée, Monsieur le président, est-ce que des entreprises sont parties, elles ne viennent pas parce qu’on n’est pas capable offrir la même chose que le voisin ou que le concurrent.

6265 Merci.

6266 LE PRÉSIDENT: Et est-ce que c'est un facteur clé ou un facteur parmi d’autres facteurs quand les entreprises décident soit de ne pas s’installer ou de quitter? Parce qu’il y a d’autres facteurs qui démontrent -- qui amènent une entreprise de s’installer en quelque part. Y a les réseaux de communications. Y a la main-d’œuvre, la disponibilité de la main-d’œuvre qualifiée, les taux de fiscalité, etcetera.

6267 Donc selon votre expérience, quand vous ne pouvez pas attirer ou même lorsque vous pouvez attirer des entreprises ou les empêcher de quitter ou parce qu’ils ont quitté, est-ce que c'est un facteur qui est équivalent, la connectivité, aux autres facteurs que j’ai mentionnés, peut-être d’autres, ou est-ce que c'est un facteur beaucoup plus important à votre avis?

6268 M. VACHON: Ben lorsqu’on parle pour l’ensemble de la MRC, on va atténuer l’effet parce que, nous, on est en milieu rural. Alors, quand je vous ai dit qu’on parlait pour une partie de la MRC, on est capable desservir l'ensemble. Mais il faut comprendre aussi que si on crée des situations ou des endroits de pauvreté, c'est pas mieux non plus.

6269 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui.

6270 M. VACHON: Ce qu’on veut avoir en fait c'est l’égalité des chances pour tous. Je sais pas si mes collègues veulent ajouter?

6271 M. BERTHOLD: Je pourrais ajouter, Monsieur Blais, en attendant, j’ai été maire de Thetford Mines puis on a des entreprises qui ont voulu agrandir, puis ils nous ont carrément dit sur la table, « On n’agrandit pas. On prend pas d’expansion si la ville vous nous amenez pas le fil internet jusqu’au bout de la rue, » parce que les compagnies voulaient pas le faire. On a eu ce genre -- ça été concret. Je l'ai vécu personnellement.

6272 L’autre chose que je peux vous dire c'est est-ce que c'est un facteur, le facteur? Je vous dirai que c'est malheureusement un facteur parmi tous les facteurs mais dans chacun des facteurs. Faut que vous me comprenez là, c'est un peu dur à suivre là mais c'est que dans le fond on parle d’attirer des travailleurs. Ce qui est notre principal défi en région c'est d’attirer les travailleurs.

6273 LE PRÉSIDENT: Puis eux aussi cherchent de la connectivité.

6274 M. BERTHOLD: Donc ils cherchent la connectivité. Donc l’entreprise veut la connectivité. Le travailleur veut la connectivité. Les clients veulent la connectivité. Fait quand on met ce facteur déterminant mais pas le seul dans chacun des critères, ben on est vraiment comme des citoyens de deuxième zone dans les régions.

6275 Madame Fecteau?

6276 Mme FECTEAU: Ben en fait ce que ça fait c'est que nos gens viennent -- comme Monsieur Berthold dit, ils viennent pas pour ces raisons-là et nos jeunes ne restent pas aussi pour ces raisons-là, ce qui sont nos futurs travailleurs. Donc c'est une roue-là. Fait que si on n'est pas capable de régler ce problème-là, c'est sûr qu’on va être obligé de régler aussi les autres problèmes mais c'est un élément essentiel à notre démarche en tout cas.

6277 LE PRÉSIDENT: Plus tôt cette semaine, on a eu des intervenants des municipalités juste au nord de Montréal, dans le nord -- pas le grand nord mais le nord de Montréal, qui ont fait part des préoccupations semblables. Mais j’ai constaté possiblement que c'est une situation différente dans votre cas parce que, eux, ils voyaient une croissance de la population et parce qu’on sait que Montréal s’étend vers le nord.

6278 Dans votre cas, je note qu’il y a des indications d’une décroissance. Est-ce que lors de vos entretiens avec les fournisseurs de services potentiels, est-ce qu’ils calculent cet -- est-ce que ça devient un désincitatif parce que le plan d’affaire devient de plus en plus difficile avec une décroissance en termes de densité par kilomètre linéaire?

6279 M. LABRECQUE: C'est justement la raison pour laquelle ils demandent une participation financière des municipalités pour compenser la densité. Puis je pense pas qu’ils vont jusqu’à se projeter en termes de croissance de clientèle ou de régression mais ils comptent le nombre de ménages présents ou le nombre de maisons parce qu’ils marchent par porte eux là.

6280 Alors, c'est certainement à cause du nombre de portes au kilomètre qu’ils ne peuvent pas intervenir ou qu’ils demandent aux municipalités de contribuer financièrement.

6281 Et tout à l’heure quand Monsieur Berthold disait on nous demande 1,000$, c'est qu’il y a pas de règle non plus. Fait qu’on est laissé « à la merci », entre guillemets-là, des barèmes des entreprises. Fait qu’il va arriver des dérapages c'est sûr et certain parce que les municipalités veulent un résultat mais ils sont pas des télécommunicateurs. Ils connaissent pas toutes les règles. Fait qu’ils vont contribuer pour avoir le résultat mais on se fie à l’expertise de l’entreprise pour évaluer cette contribution demandée de la part de l’entreprise.

6282 Alors je pense qu’il y a lieu aussi de -- on en a parlé tantôt là -- d’ordonnancer ça ou de mettre des règles-là parce que je suis convaincu qu’on est à la veille de voir des dérapages là-dedans là.

6283 LE PRÉSIDENT: D’accord. Et vous vous sentez mal outillé en termes de votre capacité pour avoir ce genre d’entretien ou de négociation?

6284 M. BERTHOLD: Oui, définitivement, Monsieur le président. Définitivement, on est mal outillé parce qu’on est laissé un -- chaque petite municipalité est laissée à elle-même, ne connaît pas ça.

6285 Et je veux juste -- on a fait une rencontre avec les -- encore une fois, celle que j’ai parlé avec les petits câblodistributeurs du secteur de la MRC du Granit, puis on nous parlait y a eu des programmes gouvernementaux qui ont été mis en place dans le passé pour aider et juste emplir la demande, ça demande l’embauche d’un ingénieur, ça demande déjà le quart ou la moitié du fameux 100,000$ qu’il va falloir un jour plus tard payer, tellement que c'est compliqué d’avoir accès au programme de financement.

6286 Donc y a beaucoup de petites entreprises qui ont décidé si vous voulez qu’on y aille, c'est correct, mais il va falloir que la municipalité paye aussi l’analyse des besoins, l’analyse des -- pour faire remplir la demande qui est demandée là.

6287 LE PRÉSIDENT: Dans vos commentaires, vous faites état de la situation des réseaux de large bande ou de l’absence des réseaux de large bande, et aussi de l’enjeu des -- on va les appeler les cellulaires, la téléphonie cellulaire sans fil.

6288 C'est clair que la disponibilité de réseaux cellulaires ajoute à la sécurité routière. Ça ça va -- je pense on va le tenir pour acquis. Aussi pour la sécurité dans les chantiers ou partout où il pourrait y avoir des enjeux-là où on a besoin de rejoindre des gens assez rapidement.

6289 Est-ce que votre préoccupation -- parce que les services cellulaires peuvent aussi être source d’accès à un certain service de large bande. Donc ma question c'est est-ce que votre préoccupation sur la disponibilité des cellulaires porte surtout ou presqu’exclusivement par rapport à la sécurité routière, ou vous pensez aussi qu’il y a un élément par rapport à la disponibilité de l'internet?

6290 M. VACHON: Monsieur le président, je suis tellement content de la question. J’osais pas en parler parce qu'on -- c'était pour internet mais récemment, un citoyen est venu s’installer chez nous et Bell nous a appris que ils ne déploieraient plus de fil de cuivre, le fil traditionnel.

6291 Notre population c’est 375 personnes dans le village. Alors ne déployant pas de fil de cuivre on n’a pas accès non plus à la fibre optique, ni au cellulaire.

6292 Alors ça vaut quoi un terrain, une propriété, où les gens n’ont pas le téléphone?

6293 On est en 2016. Finalement on a négocié avec Bell puis pour un coût d’environ 6,000$ on a réussi à faire brancher des gens.

6294 Ils nous ont avertis c’est fini cette technologie là. Or, on n’a pas la population pour avoir la fibre optique; on est dans une zone morte ou le cellulaire n’entre pas, alors qu’est-ce que ça vaut?

6295 Et on est en 2016 et on veut faire partie du processus évolutif et économique du Canada. Ça nous cause une -- ça nous cause une problématique.

6296 LE PRÉSIDENT: Juste pour bien comprendre c’était une nouvelle construction, puis les gens voulaient se brancher au réseau d’une façon quelconque?

6297 M. VACHON: Oui.

6298 LE PRÉSIDENT: Puis ce n’était pas possible jusque ---

6299 M. VACHON: C’est juste parce que -- parce que Bell -- et je comprends la décision. C’est une décision d’affaire et c’est correct, parce que c’est une technologie dépassée.

6300 On en met plus de fil de cuivre, mais on n’a pas la fibre optique et on n’a pas le cellulaire.

6301 LE PRÉSIDENT: Et qui a payé pour le 6,000$?

6302 M. VACHON: La municipalité. Parce que sinon le résident ne venait pas.

6303 LE PRÉSIDENT: Et vous vous avez fait un calcul -- ce n’est pas un calcul d’affaire, mais c’est un calcul économique quand même là de --

6304 M. VACHON: Oui.

6305 LE PRÉSIDENT: -- que le retour sur l’investissement -- ce n’est pas le bon mot-là, mais parce que c’est des payeurs de taxes (inaudible).

6306 M. VACHON: Oui, mais sauf que Bell -- si Bell nous avait dit, écoutez, continuer on va mettre le fil de cuivre bon au moins on pourrait dire aux gens vous aurez le téléphone.

6307 Mais si des gens viennent chez nous, écoutez, la discussion ne sera pas longue. On va leur dire vous n’avez pas le téléphone.

6308 LE PRÉSIDENT: Puis il y a une partie de ce 6,000-là qui est répartie sur les autres contribuables.

6309 Est-ce que vous avez vu une ouverture des autres contribuables à contribuer à l’arrivée de ce nouveaux ou est-ce que ça créé un peu de tension dans votre communauté?

6310 M. VACHON: Il y a eu des discussions.

--- (LAUGHTER)

6311 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui. Donc il n’a pas de -- c’est difficile de partager les frais de la connectivité, parce que il n’a peut-être pas un consensus social? Iriez-vous jusque-là?

6312 M. VACHON: Bien ce qu’on veut faire maintenant on est -- on va demander une étude pour la fibre optique.

6313 Bon, il semblerait que c’est autour de 400 ou 500,000$ là. On n’a pas l’étude-là. Puis on va aller à un référendum. On va demander à la population ce qu’elle en pense, mais on est seul à supporter ça.

6314 Mais nous on pense qu’il n’y a aucun développement possible chez nous. J’allais dire même pas de développement -- une possibilité de sous-développement, on a peur que les gens quittent, parce qu’on n’est pas capable d’amener une couverture adéquate de communication moderne.

6315 Alors on -- si on n’a pas de partenaires on va y aller. On va s’endetter, mais c’est la survie de notre municipalité qui est en cause.

6316 LE PRÉSIDENT: C’est pour faire un prêt municipal à plus long terme?

6317 M. VACHON: Oui, oui. Si on est autorisé à le faire, bien sûr.

6318 LE PRÉSIDENT: Et -- évidemment. Est-ce que vous avez les mêmes enjeux?

6319 Parce que je vais vous poser la question -- on a souvent des programmes d’infrastructure, soit au fédéral, provincial, et je l’ai même vu quand j’étais sous-ministre adjoint au Ministère du Patrimoine.

6320 Oui les gens viennent ils disent oui, oui, on veut une salle de constable, présentation, petit musé, quelque chose comme ça.

6321 Mais quand vient le temps d’établir les priorités, parce qu’on sait que les projets d’infrastructure souvent ceux qui les gèrent demandent aux autres niveaux de gouvernement quelles sont vos priorités, et malheureusement -- ou heureusement je ne le sais pas là, je ne voulais pas faire un jugement.

6322 Mais souvent c’est les chemins, les aqueducs, il y a toutes sortes de choses, et donc si on commence à financer des services de connectivité à votre avis est-ce qu’il y a un consensus social que c’est quelque chose d’aussi important ou plus important que les chemins, les ---

6323 M. VACHON: Bien je vous dirais le consensus social, non. La discussion n’est pas allez là.

6324 Mais les gens considèrent aussi important la connectivité que la route. Parce que maintenant c’est comme ça qu’on travaille.

6325 LE PRÉSIDENT: M’hm.

6326 M. VACHON: Écoutez, la ville voisine est à neuf kilomètres de chez nous. Notre population ne justifie pas que le câble ou la fibre optique se rende chez nous et on est dans une situation où entre deux villages ils sont branchés, ils sont câblés, puis nous on ne l’est pas.

6327 Ça crée des situations extrêmement difficiles pour des petites municipalités.

6328 LE PRÉSIDENT: M’hm.

6329 Est-ce que c’est -- c’est aussi -- c’est quelque chose qui nous trotte dans la tête ça de voir. Parce qu’effectivement un programme qu’on créerait suite à cette audience-ci a une distribution de ce coût-là sur d’autres.

6330 Dans notre cas ce n’est pas des payeurs de taxes, c’est des abonnés, mais néanmoins il y a une conséquence possible. Et souvent c’est difficile déjà pour le conseil dans certains dossiers, quand qu’on affecte les prix c’est encore pire.

6331 M. LAVERGNE: Cette année juste à titre d’exemple, trois municipalités de la MRC ont -- ils n’ont pas été jusqu’à faire des débats sociaux, mais qu’ils ont investies de l’argent, des taxes municipales, pour la fibre optique.

6332 Fait que dans ces municipalités là je pense que -- puis il n’y a pas eu d’opposition-là. Il y a une reconnaissance de ---

6333 LE PRÉSIDENT: D’accord il y a un argument à faire?

6334 M. LAVERGNE: Ah oui, oui, puis c’est assez facile, je pense, de convaincre la population d’investir le -- qui n’est pas un énorme montant quand même là, mais que c’est une -- c’est une exigence-là fait que ---

6335 LE PRÉSIDENT: Par rapport aux réseaux de large bande, un des enjeux que nous avons c’est de définir ce qui pourrait être un service de base obligatoire.

6336 Je me demandais si vous avez des recommandations plus spécifiques par rapport, je ne sais pas moi, la disponibilité de vitesse, de capacité, d’autres normes techniques ou peut-être que vous nous laissez venir à une conclusion?

6337 M. BERTHOLD: On est -- on n’est pas des ingénieurs. On ne connait pas ça.

6338 Mais ce que je peux dire c’est qu’on a aussi -- j’ai eu aussi l’occasion d’avoir une rencontre avec Bell, qu’ils vont investir 21 milliard dans le déploiement de ces réseaux internet au cours des prochaines années.

6339 C’est ce qu’on nous a dit et la majorité de ces investissements-là vont aller à l’amélioration de la desserte des territoires urbains. Plus vite, plus de contenu, plus de tout.

6340 Donc au fur et à mesure qu’on parle, l’écart se grandit tout le temps entre les régions et les grands centres.

6341 LE PRÉSIDENT: M’hm.

6342 M. BERTHOLD: Donc la vitesse qui doit être là c’est la même pour tous. C’est -- et je n’ai pas une vitesse -- c’est tu 10, 50?

6343 Si on met –- avant on disait qu’à 5 c’était correct. Donc tout le dernier programme a été fait sur 5, puis aujourd’hui on se rend compte qu’à 5 il y a des gens qui trouvent que c’est trop lent.

6344 Donc tout le temps qu’on a préparé ça, qu’on se prépare à l’audience, les vitesses augmentent, ça va tellement vite.

6345 Qui aurait cru qu’on serait là aujourd’hui-là? Qu’y’aurait cinq téléphones cellulaires dans une maison, chaque enfant à son téléphone cellulaire.

6346 Donc ça créé une -- pour les compagnies beaucoup d’adaptation. Il a fallu qu’ils s’adaptent, mais il y a des sous, donc ils l’ont fait.

6347 Mais sauf qu’un moment donné on ne peut pas -- on ne peut pas fixer un barème bon bien ça c’est correct en région, puis ça c’est correct en ville.

6348 LE PRÉSIDENT: O.k.

6349 M. BERTHOLD: J’ai de la difficulté à vous dire ça.

6350 Juste -- je veux revenir sur quelque chose que vous avez posé comme question tantôt. On ne vous a pas répondu sur l’accès par cellulaire à la large bande.

6351 À coût et vitesse équivalent, oui, mais en ce moment les coûts c’est exorbitants par -- on parle de 90$ pour 4 gigs de données par mois.

6352 Tant que ça va être ça là oubliez ça. Ça ne sera pas une solution pour les régions rurales, même si on met des tours partout là, parce que le coût est bien trop grand.

6353 LE PRÉSIDENT: Sommes toute c’est -- la question du cellulaire c’est par rapport à la sécurité, puis la disponibilité, puis aussi pour attirer les entreprises parce que ---

6354 M. LAVERGNE: Puis les affaires aussi.

6355 LE PRÉSIDENT: Les affaires, oui. Effectivement.

6356 Mais par rapport à la large bande vous voyez ça plutôt une solution filaire?

6357 M. BERTHOLD: Oui, tout à fait.

6358 LE PRÉSIDENT: Outre –- bon premièrement votre première priorité, je pense, c’est la disponibilité, la connectivité du –- des réseaux à large bandes.

6359 La vitesse et les autres normes plus techniques de capacité, vitesse, latence, tout ça, votre position, si je comprends bien, c’est que ça devrait être comparable à d’autres endroits dans -- sur le territoire?

6360 Dans ce que –--

6361 M. LABRECQUE: Moi je ne verrais pas pour quoi que ça ferait qu’il y aurait deux vitesses qui existeraient sur le même territoire.

6362 Je suis producteur agricole, j’ai des enfants qui prennent la relève. Moi je vais aller rester au village. Je vais avoir droit probablement, vu que je suis dans une zone urbaine, à une plus grande vitesse qu’eux autres, qui sont en affaires puis moi je vais être retraité.

6363 Là il faut faire attention un petit peu à ça ici-là.

6364 LE PRÉSIDENT: O.k. Qu’en est-il de l’abordabilité?

6365 Parce que même si certains ont payer le prix un moment donné -- et parfois pour avoir des services semblable lorsqu’on est en région éloignée, il y a des services qui coutent plus chers.

6366 Quelle est la réaction de votre population par rapport au -- à la possibilité que c’est bien beau avoir les services comparables, mais ça pourrait être un coût plus élevé?

6367 Est-ce qu’y’a quelqu’un qui ose répondre à cette question-là?

--- (LAUGHTER)

6368 M. LAVERGNE: Je vous dirais que présentement ils sont prêts à payer un peu plus parce que ils ont faim pour du service. Pour l’instant déjà ça coûte plus cher.

6369 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui. Mais pas -- évidemment j’ai posé une question un peu ouverte. Il y a une limite à la ---

6370 M. LAVERGNE: Oui, oui. Effectivement.

6371 LE PRÉSIDENT: Il faut que ça soit relativement comparable, Monsieur est-ce que c’est ce que vous diriez; oui?

6372 M. BILODEAU: Oui, bien vous l’avez vu Madame Fecteau dans sa présentation vous a présenté les chiffres qu’on a actuellement.

6373 Xplornet c'est 85$ par mois, alors que Câble Axion c'est 54. Donc vous le voyez que les gens sont prêts à payer un peu plus cher dans nos villages qui sont pas desservis.

6374 LE PRÉSIDENT: Pour avoir quelque chose.

6375 M. BILODEAU: Effectivement.

6376 LE PRÉSIDENT: Justement à propos d’Xplornet, je sais pas si vous avez eu la chance de suivre les audiences plus tôt cette semaine. On a entendu des présentations de fournisseurs satellitaires dont Xplornet et leur plan comprend le déploiement de nouvelles capacités.

6377 Est-ce que vous avez eu la chance de suivre ces présentations-là? Et sinon, ben je vais arrêter là. Ou si vous avez entendu une partie de leur présentation, est-ce que ça vous a donné un peu de confort?

6378 M. BILODEAU: Nous avec nos quatre coopératives, on a regardé la possibilité d’Xplornet. Au mieux, on peut avoir des capacités de bandes passantes mais avec le temps de latence entre le message, jamais un satellite ne pourra égaler la fibre parce qu’il y aura toujours un temps de latence entre la personne qui envoie le satellite et que ça retourne au récepteur.

6379 Donc malgré les meilleures technologies, je pense pas qu’on va jamais réussir à égaler la fibre. C'est impossible là.

6380 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui, mais sur certaines applications, ces paramètres techniques là tels que la latence sont moins importants. Je suis d’accord avec vous sur certains jeux vidéo là que -- puis on sait que les jeunes sont là-dessus mais c'est plus important là que -- puis peut-être même des entretiens vidéo, mais sur d’autres applications bancaires, c'est moins significatif.

6381 M. BILODEAU: Peut-être au niveau bancaire mais nous à la MRC du Granit on a eu la chance d’avoir un parc éolien dans notre secteur et y a des données qui sont envoyées, y a les machines qui sont contrôlées à distance, et la fibre devient un élément très important.

6382 On en parlait tantôt des dynamiques entre les industriels qui ont besoin des fois d’entretenir des machines, de travailler dans leur procédé avec des entreprises à l’extérieur. Ils ont besoin de ces services-là.

6383 Donc peut-être que la latence dans certains cas ça peut être un élément mais quand on opère à distance, ça devient plus complexe.

6384 M. LAVERGNE: Ça crée aussi des formes de monopoles. On était, à la première vague d’Xplornet, à la merci d’Xplornet.

6385 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui, parce qu’y avait pas d’autre ---

6386 M. LAVERGNE: Pas d’autre chose puis on est à la merci du développement de cette entreprise-là, alors que si la fibre peut être installée dans les poteaux, ben y a une saine concurrence pour obtenir un service de qualité.

6387 M. BERTHOLD: Et j’ajouterais à ça justement que si y a une saine concurrence, alors Xplornet pourra avoir accès au marché comme les autres et offrir un service s’il le considère aussi efficace que le filaire, ben à ce moment-là ils en feront la preuve au consommateurs. Ça sera aux consommateurs à décider.

6388 LE PRÉSIDENT: J’aimerais vous entendre sur vos expériences par rapport au système de subvention. Et pour nous aider à mieux comprendre, à votre avis, qu'est-ce qui fonctionne bien puis qu’est-ce qui pourrait mieux fonctionner, selon vos expériences?

6389 Que ça soit des -- pas besoin de pointer du doigt soit le fédéral ou provincial ou d’autres là, mais c'est quoi les facteurs gagnants pour un système -- les éléments gagnants pour un système de subvention que vous envisagez, basé sur votre expérience personnelle?

6390 M. BERTHOLD: Je pense que les MRC sont bien placées. Donc je vais leur laisser ---

6391 M. LAVERGNE: Ben les subventions qu’on a connues nous enlignaient avec les montants qu’ils nous offraient, nous enlignaient vers des solutions micro-ondes avec -- juste pour la MRC de l’Érable là, 1,290, ça prenait 45 tours pour se relayer parce que la subvention permettait pas d’aller vers la fibre-là. Mais ça l’a eu un temps ça là.

6392 LE PRÉSIDENT: Pis ça le problème c'était en raison du design à l’origine du programme gouvernemental qui avait été créé.

6393 M. LAVERGNE: Et des fonds disponibles surtout.

6394 LE PRÉSIDENT: Ah, o.k., parce que ---

6395 M. LAVERGNE: Parce qu’une fibre c'est 12,000 piastres du kilomètre.

6396 LE PRÉSIDENT: O.k., je comprends. Donc c'était pas que le programme vous limitait, c'est que les fonds disponibles vous limitaient dans la technologie que vous pouviez déployer.

6397 M. LAVERGNE: Exact. Fait que puis ça c'est en train d'être abandonné parce que ça devient obsolète rapidement. On a parlé des technologies. Après ça est arrivé le Ymax, puis est arrivé toutes sortes de bébelles qui ont fait que c'est devenu obsolète là.

6398 LE PRÉSIDENT: Et vous avez parlé tout à l’heure aussi de la possibilité -- du problème de l’exclusivité. Donc ça c'est une -- peut-être une leçon à ne pas apprendre pour l’avenir.

6399 Est-ce qu’il y a d’autres expériences qui pourraient nous aider à ne pas les répéter ou de les répéter quand c'est positif?

6400 M. BERTHOLD: Y a une expérience mais je sais pas, moi j’étais moins impliqué mais dans la MRC des Appalaches, un moment donné on a eu de l’argent de la Conférence régionale des élus pour faire une analyse des besoins puis comment on devrait réussir à faire la couverture internet. Donc si aujourd’hui on est ici devant vous c'est que ç'a pas fonctionné.

6401 LE PRÉSIDENT: Je comprends.

6402 M. BERTHOLD: Peut-être Monsieur Vachon a été impliqué plus que moi dans ---

6403 M. VACHON: En fait, finalement, on avait un projet pour l’ensemble de la MRC mais les décisions politiques ont été davantage tournées vers Xplornet, ce qui fait que notre projet a pas eu lieu.

6404 Cependant, ce qu’on nous a dit c'est que le prix de la fibre optique avait diminué considérablement. C'est pour ça que maintenant on est à regarder la possibilité de le faire.

6405 Le faire tout seul, ça sera difficile, mais si on veut vraiment que les statistiques que vous nous avez fournies tantôt soient vraies, ben faisons rien. Mais si on veut les faire mentir, ben déployons la fibre optique, soyons dynamiques puis attirons des gens. Puis à ce moment-là, on va inverser la tendance de vieillissement de population et on pourra avoir également une société dynamique.

6406 On l’a démontré. On était mono industriel. On avait des mines d’amiante. Elles sont parties. On a continué le travail. On a réussi à maintenir nos populations puis à se développer. On est capable faire encore plus.

6407 LE PRÉSIDENT: Mais vous réalisez et puis vous êtes conscient, pis c'est correct, que dans des endroits de moindre densité que ça va être nécessairement en partenariat avec le secteur privé puis le secteur gouvernemental?

6408 M. VACHON: Oui, mais les municipalités sont prêtes à le faire. Mais toutes seules, c'est difficile.

6409 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui, oui, ma question présumait un partenariat.

6410 M. VACHON: En partenariat, on va y aller mais nécessité fait loi. On en a besoin de cette autoroute-là de numérique. On va y aller.

6411 LE PRÉSIDENT: Lorsque vous avez des discussions avec les divers niveaux de gouvernements, soit à Québec dans votre cas ou au fédéral, est-ce qu’il y a une ouverture à ce genre de conversations en termes de subventions? Est-ce qu’il y a une compréhension ou est-ce qu’on est encore dans les routes et d’autres infrastructures?

6412 M. VACHON: On est encore dans les routes et autres infrastructures et on n’a pas abordé encore ce sujet-là. On le fait avec vous.

6413 LE PRÉSIDENT: O.k.

6414 M. BERTHOLD: Juste là-dessus, Monsieur Blais, je trouve que votre question est très pertinente parce que, effectivement, les municipalités ont beaucoup de besoins en termes d’infrastructures.

6415 Donc comme les coûts des infrastructures c'est énorme et que le gouvernement a mis beaucoup de règles notamment sur les eaux usées qui doivent répondre à des nouveaux critères très, très bientôt, on a eu toute une vague de modernisation des réseaux d’eau potable où les petites municipalités arrivaient pas à payer. Donc le gouvernement, l’argent au niveau du Québec notamment a été dirigé par le gouvernement vers ces grosses infrastructures-là parce que les besoins étaient là. On parlait de santé de la population.

6416 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui, mais c'est un cercle vicieux parce que vous attirez pas les entreprises et les résidents pour ---

6417 M. BERTHOLD: C'est ça.

6418 LE PRÉSIDENT: --- bâtir votre base de taxes foncières et donc par conséquence -- bon, on voit le portrait.

6419 M. BERTHOLD: Oui, vous comprenez très bien.

6420 LE PRÉSIDENT: Mais vous seriez -- ah, une dernière question avant que je me tourne vers mes collègues-là s’ils ont des questions, est-ce que vous avez un commentaire par rapport -- on a parlé de vitesse de téléchargement. Notre norme a toujours été 5 et 1 et je me demandais si vous aviez un point de vue sur la vitesse de téléversement.

6421 M. BERTHOLD: Honnêtement, on n’en a pas parlé beaucoup entre nous. Je sais pas si Monsieur Bilodeau peut en parler.

6422 M. BILODEAU: Chez nous en tout cas actuellement, suite justement au dégât que vous avez -- que vous connaissez tous au niveau de Lac-Mégantic, on a été obligé de se reconstruire et notre réseau informatique entre autres pour les bureaux de la MRC, on fonctionne avec une compagnie qui est située à Montréal.

6423 On a une capacité de 30 mégabits pour entrer et de 10 pour envoyer et c'est suffisant. Ça nous permet de fonctionner correctement. Et je pense que ces vitesses-là sont relativement de base et nécessaires.

6424 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui. Est-ce que c'est suffisant ou trop ou est-ce que vous avez planifié pour une période de temps -- vous prévoyez que ça va -- les demandes de téléversement vont augmenter?

6425 M. BILODEAU: Ça dépend un petit peu des activités de chacun mais nous autres à notre niveau en tout ça, on a aussi notre service d’évaluation qui est logé à distance. On a tout notre service d’aménagement. On a des cartes. On a des éléments qui sont lourds à sortir. Donc, oui, ça prend une capacité de pousser.

6426 Quand on parlait tantôt des entreprises, une compagnie qui a un plan à envoyer à un de ses fournisseurs, ça prend une capacité de sortie parce qu’on est dans des images lourdes et donc moi je considère que 10 en tout cas c'est pas trop dans les temps qu’on est là.

6427 LE PRÉSIDENT: Surtout pour le secteur affaires.

6428 M. BILODEAU: Surtout pour le secteur affaires, oui.

6429 LE PRÉSIDENT: O.k. Je comprends.

6430 M. BERTHOLD: Puis peut-être juste pour -- encore une fois je vais repasser ma même ligne.

6431 C’est que aujourd’hui la technologie évolue tellement vite, que le jour où la majorité des grands centres vont être à 10 en téléchargement, bien les programmes vont être fait pour fonctionner à 10 en téléchargement.

6432 Donc si on met la norme trop basse en région, bien là on va être encore une fois en retard. C’est toujours ça qui arrive.

6433 On met une norme à un niveau. Le 5 et le 1 que vous parlez aujourd’hui en ville ce n’est plus vrai là.

6434 LE PRÉSIDENT: M’hm.

6435 M. BERTHOLD: Dans nos régions c’est encore ça dans plusieurs secteurs, mais ce n’est plus vrai.

6436 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui.

6437 M. BERTHOLD: Donc aujourd’hui ça évolue tellement vite qu’on -- c’est difficile d’anticiper les besoins, puis de répondre à une question comme celle-là.

6438 LE PRÉSIDENT: Je comprends. Et puis vous allez avoir l’occasion dans les autres phases, suite à l’audience, de le faire valoir.

6439 Et tenez compte que le Conseil pourrait traiter des questions de vitesse, par exemple, de deux façons et ils ne sont pas nécessairement en contradiction.

6440 On peut créer une norme de vision, d’aspiration à plus long terme parce que ça aide les gens de -- lorsqu’il y a de la construction de faire le design en conséquence.

6441 Ça c’est une question, mais elle n’est pas -- ce n’est pas une norme obligatoire, c’est une norme plus visionnaire.

6442 Et l’autre enjeu que nous avons c’est devrait-il y avoir une norme obligatoire pour les services?

6443 Puis ça c’est un autre enjeu, donc ---

6444 M. BERTHOLD: Oui, mais on pourra se prononcer sur la norme obligatoire à ce moment-là effectivement.

6445 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui.

6446 M. BERTHOLD: Parce que l’important c’est de -- d’essayer d’éviter de toujours avoir un système à deux vitesses.

6447 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui et du rattrapage --

6448 M. BERTHOLD: Continuel.

6449 LE PRÉSIDENT: -- pour les gens qui sont mal desservis.

6450 Je me tourne vers mes collègues. Oui, Monsieur le vice-président?

6451 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Je suis désolé mais je vais poser ma question en anglais.

6452 I got a little lost in the interpretation, so can you just summarize for me please the -- I heard about municipal investment and I heard for cooperatives.

6453 And I’m just trying to get a sense, if somebody could put that together in a -- in a summary and tell me if I -- what I may have missed, about how you have -- what level of municipal investment there have been -- there has been and through what tools you’ve used or were there structures or was it directly from municipalities?

6454 M. BERTHOLD: Il y a eu -- there’s so many examples; o.k.?

6455 UNKNOWN SPEAKER: (inaudible)

6456 LE PRÉSIDENT: On a l’interprétation.

6457 M. BERTHOLD: Bien ça va être mieux.

6458 LE PRÉSIDENT: Dans votre langue, s’il vous plait.

--- (LAUGHTER)

6459 M. BERTHOLD: Mais ça -- il y a eu plusieurs -- c’est tellement différent le passé par projet, que c’est difficile de dire est-ce qu’y’a un plan précis.

6460 Dans le passé comment que ça été, les municipalités ont simplement décidé d’investir le montant demandé par l’entreprise. Donc c’était le pattern.

6461 Les gens demandaient des sous puis c’était comme ça. Si on voulait avoir internet bien c’est l’entreprise qui fixait la facture.

6462 Peut-être que ceux qui l’ont vécus vont vous donner plus de détails-là, mais c’est comme ça que ça fonctionné et il n’y a pas eu de contrepartie des autres paliers de gouvernement, je ne crois pas, qui ont contribué à payer cette partie de facture municipale.

6463 M. LAVERGNE: Puis il y a -- mais il y a une question légale aussi. Les compétences des municipalités au niveau légal ne permettent pas d’investir dans un projet commercial directement.

6464 Fait que souvent ils passent par une organisation parapluie ou on the side, to -- pour financer le projet en question, parce que ce n’est pas dans les compétences légales de la municipalité d’investir dans un projet collectif.

6465 Et il y a aussi la question des appels d’offres. Une municipalité ne peut pas contribuer à plus de 25,000$ à un projet.

6466 Donc les projets sont beaucoup plus importants que ça, donc soit qu’elle va en appel d’offre public, donc ça prend un devis technique très élaboré, ou elle trouve une façon créative de contribuer financièrement à une entreprise en question sans aller en appel d’offre.

6467 Et des fois c’est peut-être la coopérative qui peut être un outil, ça peut être un versement, tant par année.

6468 Il faut être créatif aujourd’hui parce que les pouvoirs législatifs des municipalités ne sont pas adaptés à atteindre ce résultat-là.

6469 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Merci, je comprends.

6470 LE PRÉSIDENT: Ce qui m’amène à vous poser la question, je ne sais pas si vous avez pris connaissance de la présentation du -- c’est les préfets de l’Est de l’Ontario, the Eastern Ontario Wardens Caucus, qui ont créé un genre PPP.

6471 Est-ce que vous avez eu la chance d’examiner ce modèle-là? Est-ce qu’il serait applicable dans votre réalité?

6472 M. BERTHOLD: Malheureusement, Monsieur le président, on a obtenu tous les documents cette semaine.

6473 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui.

6474 M. BERTHOLD: Donc je n’ai pas eu l’occasion de le partager. On trouve que -- moi en tout cas personnellement j’ai été un petit peu informé du projet. Je trouve que le projet est très intéressant.

6475 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui.

6476 M. BERTHOLD: C’est une communauté qui s’est pris en main, qui a réussi à ordonner -- c’est un peu ce que je demande au CRTC. Ils ont réussis à ordonner le développement d’une manière intelligente.

6477 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui.

6478 M. BERTHOLD: D’après la présentation que j’ai eu puis je pense que ça pourrait être un modèle qui pourrait s’appliquer.

6479 Malheureusement je n’ai pas eu la chance de le partager aux autres préfets encore, parce que j’ai eu les documents cette semaine, mais à première vue, selon les commentaires que j’ai eu, c’est une expérience qui vaut la peine d’être regardée par nos territoires.

6480 M. LAVERGNE: Sans l’avoir vue par exemple, les municipalités de l’Ontario ne sont pas régies par la même loi que les municipalités du Québec.

6481 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui, je ---

6482 M. LAVERGNE: Fait qu’il peut avoir des nuances.

6483 LE PRÉSIDENT: Les contraintes sont à vertus -- au Québec c’est -- ça fait longtemps que j’ai -- à l’époque il y avait encore le -- les cités civiles et puis les municipalités de ---

6484 M. LAVERGNE: Le code -- la loi sur les compétences municipales puis le code ---

6485 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui, oui, donc c’est les limites et il n’y a pas de projet pour changer ça pour même aider. Ça coûte rien ça pour aider le déploiement des infrastructures numériques?

6486 M. LAVERGNE: Il faudrait demander aux législateurs provinciales(sic).

6487 LE PRÉSIDENT: Ah, ils sont bien loin. Je pense que vous êtes plus proche.

6488 M. BERTHOLD: Là, là, mais Monsieur Blais, je pense que vous touchez exactement sur un point.

6489 Comme c’est -- en ce moment c’est un peu le capharnaüm dans le déploiement d’internet large bande. Les municipalités, comme l’on dit, tentent de faire leur possible avec le peu de moyens qu’ils ont.

6490 Si on avait un plan on pourrait aider, aller voir le gouvernement puis dire, écoutez, on s’en va dans cette direction-là, on a besoin d’une législation.

6491 Je suis sûr que les élus ici vont faire leur travail de représentation auprès des instances compétentes pour le faire.

6492 Quand il y a une solution, quand on voit un chemin à quelque part s’ouvrir, habituellement des gens qui en ont vraiment besoin vont embarquer très, très vite dedans.

6493 LE PRÉSIDENT: M’hm. Je comprends.

6494 Je me tourne vers mes collègues contentieux, non?

6495 L’autre jour je parlais à quelqu’un, juste en conclusion, puis on -- je leur disait que dans les érablières on va chercher l’eau d’érable, puis on fait bouillir, puis on fait une réduction, puis en bout de ligne c’est sucré, puis c’est bon.

6496 Le problème dans le domaine des télécommunications, une fois qu’on a desservis les grands centres ou qu’il y a des raisons d’affaires, à la fin on est rendu à des situations d’affaires qui sont plus troublantes. Il y a moins bon service, puis il y a beaucoup d’amertume.

6497 Donc c’est -- j’ai pensé à cette analogie que j’avais donné à quelqu’un la semaine dernière quand j’ai vu que vous veniez du pays de l’érable donc -- et ça m’apparait tout à fait à point dans ce cas-ci.

6498 Parce que là on est rendu au problème assez difficile du déploiement de la connectivité et ce n’est pas toujours facile.

6499 M. BERTHOLD: Et notre grand défi, Monsieur le président, c’est que quand on regarde la carte du Canada, puis la carte de desserte des citoyens on se rend compte que seulement quelques pourcents des gens qui ne sont pas desservis.

6500 Malheureusement c’est ça le Canada. Le Canada c’est un Canada qui est rural. C’est un Canada ou on a voulu occuper de grande partie de notre territoire.

6501 Et si il y a la moitié de la population du Québec qui vit à Montréal, il y a la moitié -- l’autre moitié vit dans des centres et dans des communautés rurales et jamais, jamais, on a demandé aux entreprises de prévoir un plan globale.

6502 Si on avait réparti tout ça sur l’ensemble des payeurs ça n’aurait pas coûté cher de déployer internet partout.

6503 Malheureusement on est rendu à une autre étape donc je pense qu’il faut ordonner différemment.

6504 LE PRÉSIDENT: On ne peut pas retourner ---

6505 M. BERTHOLD: Puis pour ce qui est du sirop d’érable le meilleur est vraiment produit dans notre comté ---

--- (LAUGHTER)

6506 LE PRÉSIDENT: Je n’en doute pas.

6507 M. BERTHOLD: On -- vous êtes le bienvenue si vous voulez y gouter. Ça va nous faire plaisir.

6508 LE PRÉSIDENT: J’ai déjà eu l’occasion donc j’en suis convaincu.

6509 M. LABRECQUE: Vous avez ouvert la porte sur le sirop d’érable.

6510 Moi je veux juste vous dire que j’en fais un petit de sirop chez nous pour s’amuser. Moi j’aime bien votre exemple sur l’érable.

6511 Je prendrais la cabane à sucre comme le secteur urbain et puis toutes les branches qui emmènent l’eau à la cabane justement pour la concentrer ça serait la partie rurale.

6512 Donc je vous -- je pourrais vous dire que si la partie rurale n’existe pas ou qu’elle n’est pas bien entretenue et bien desservie, bien la partie urbaine elle va s’en -- elle va souffrir beaucoup.

6513 LE PRÉSIDENT: Oui.

--- (LAUGHTER)

6514 LE PRÉSIDENT: Sans eau il n’y a pas de sirop, de tire, ni de sucre.

6515 M. BERTHOLD: Exacte.

6516 LE PRÉSIDENT: Alors c’est très bien.

6517 Bien merci beaucoup d’avoir pris le temps de vous déplacer pour participer à nos audiences, puis je vous invite ardemment de continuer à participer dans les autres étapes. Merci beaucoup.

6518 M. BERTHOLD: Merci, Monsieur le président.

6519 LE PRÉSIDENT: Madame la secrétaire?

6520 THE SECRETARY: I would now ask the Federation of Canadian Municipalities to come to the presentation table.

6521 Please introduce yourselves for the record and you have 10 minutes.

PRESENTATION

6522 MR. LOUIE: Thank you, good afternoon. Thank you very much. Merci beaucoup. Good afternoon.

6523 I'd like to begin by thanking the Commission for the invitation to discuss a historic opportunity to transform rural and Northern Canada.

6524 I am joined today by my colleague, Ray Orb, the President of the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities and the Chair of FCM's Rural Forum.

6525 I myself am the President of the FCM, Raymond Louie. I am the Acting Mayor for the City of Vancouver.

6526 I am joined today also by Daniel Rubinstein, Senior Manager of Policy and Research, and Marc LeBlanc, Policy Officer, who both together lead FCM's telecommunications policy work.

6527 I will be sharing my time today with President Orb.

6528 The Federation of Canadian Municipalities is the national voice for Canadian municipalities and our membership spans 2,000 members from all across Canada from every corner and we represent about 90 percent of Canada's population.

6529 Our members include Canada's largest cities, small urban and rural communities, as well as 20 provincial and territorial municipal associations.

6530 The FCM works on behalf of local governments to shape the national agenda, to help solve national challenges and empower communities of all sizes. That's why FCM has long advocated for increased federal involvement in developing the telecommunications infrastructure that is critical to the social, cultural and economic vibrancy of Canada's rural, northern and remote communities.

6531 We have actively participated in previous federal consultations on telecommunications services, including rural broadband spectrum allocation and the development of Industry Canada's Connecting Canadians program.

6532 FCM has also worked closely with the CRTC on the development of a model Municipal Access Agreement for accessing municipal rights-of-way and participated in the first phase of this landmark consultation. On behalf of our members, we actively engage Minister Bains and Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada's senior leadership on these critical issues.

6533 As the national voice for municipalities, the availability of affordable broadband services is one of our major concerns. Simply put, broadband internet access has become fundamental in modern life, and has the power to transform rural and Northern Canada.

6534 Modern networks contribute to economic growth by improving productivity, providing new services,

6535 supporting innovation and improving market access. They give Canadians the capacity to collaborate, to work, share and learn.

6536 Unfortunately the broadband gap remains a reality in these communities. Too many Canadians are without broadband coverage, while others remain underserved by insufficient bandwidth and network capacity to meet user demands.

6537 Under Canada's current approach to broadband policy, there is a significant lag in terms of bringing broadband speeds and technologies widely available in urban areas to rural and remote regions.

6538 The CRTC's annual Communications Monitoring Report provides a clear picture of this lag. While 96 percent of Canadian households in large population centres have access to broadband at download speeds of 100 Mbps, only 25 percent of households in rural areas have access to broadband services at similar speeds.

6539 Low connectivity rates like these are a significant barrier for those living in rural, remote and Northern communities in attaining the kind of economic opportunities that we take for granted in other parts of the country.

6540 In Canada's North many communities simply cannot participate in Canada's digital economy due to a lack of service parity across these communities and high system vulnerability, highlighted by service outages, technical failures and lack of redundancy. FCM's research on this issue has revealed the true cost of low connectivity in these communities, everything from resident's outmigration to a difficulty in retaining and attracting employees.

6541 Not only that. Canadians living in rural, remote and Northern communities do not have equal access to government e-services and adequate speeds while others, in some cases, have no broadband access at all.

6542 Some parties have argued that the issue of adoption is an indication that some Canadians lack the technical expertise and interest to engage in the digital economy. In our view, however, this simply isn't the case. There is much greater likelihood that the lack of adoption on the part of Canadians is the result of high cost and low broadband speeds.

6543 Based on this assessment of the connectivity challenges facing rural and Northern Canada, FCM's membership has come together to develop solutions to this critical issue.

6544 And now I would like to turn it over to my colleague, Ray Orb, to tell you more about these solutions.

6545 MR. ORB: Thank you, Raymond.

6546 FCM believes that the Commission's current target speeds, a minimum of 5 Mbps download and 1 Mbps upload, are no longer sufficient to meet the minimum needs of Canadians.

6547 FCM believes that the CRTC should continually re-evaluate its broadband speed targets to reflect technological advancements, changes in user needs, traffic, and network capacity.

6548 Second, FCM believes that the Commission has a critical role to play not only in terms of setting broadband speed targets, but also in ensuring that basic telecommunications services are available to all Canadians regardless of the size or level of remoteness of their community.

6549 In our submission, we recommend that the Commission expand the Basic Service Objective, or BSO, to include universal access to affordable high-speed broadband internet at speeds that guarantee long-term, reliable connectivity. This stance has been reaffirmed by a number of FCM's peers during these proceedings.

6550 Finally, the Commission should adopt a comprehensive and long-term funding mechanism for basic broadband access and the existing arrangement for basic telecommunications services is a good starting point. This mechanism could work alongside the current mix of targeted government programs and public/private partnerships.

6551 We also suggest the Commission develop a specific strategy for Canada's North that sets out a sustained funding commitment for developing communications networks as well as a regulatory environment that fosters competition in this area.

6552 It is important the Commission ensure that investment strategies for Arctic communication networks include provisions for rapid technological change and that every Arctic community has a redundant connection to prevent gaps in essential communication services.

6553 This consultation provides an historic opportunity to establish a comprehensive, 1ong term plan for universal access to high-speed broadband. The Commission plays a critical role in ensuring basic telecommunications services, including broadband, are available to all Canadians, regardless of where in the country they reside. To realize this vision, we believe that all orders of government must work together in full partnership.

6554 The Commission has a unique opportunity to turn this bold vision into meaningful action by laying the foundation for universal and high-speed broadband access for all Canadians.

6555 On behalf of Canada's cities and communities, we thank the Commission for the opportunity to take part in this proceeding, as well as other parties' contributions and recommendations.

6556 Thank you. Merci.

6557 THE CHAIRPERSON: Well, thank you very much. We will put you in the hands of Commissioner MacDonald as a first step.

6558 MR. LOUIE: Thank you.

6559 COMMISSIONER MacDONALD: Good afternoon and thank you, especially to those of you that have travelled from far and wide to be here today, especially on a Friday afternoon.

6560 I want to understand just a little bit the survey that you presented in your original submission. As I understand, it was conducted at your annual conference in Edmonton, Alberta last year and I am just trying to understand the make-up of the room and the participants that actually filled out the survey.

6561 You have over 2,000 member municipalities. Were they all in the room? Were some communities closer to the conference site in Alberta over-represented versus other communities that might have not been represented in other parts of the country?

6562 Can you speak to how representative that group was of your wider membership?

6563 MR. LOUIE: Well, it was a survey of just our rural and Northern remote communities, not including our urban centres first of all.

6564 COMMISSIONER MacDONALD: Yeah.

6565 MR. LOUIE: The distribution of the membership at our annual conferences depended on their own self-selecting whether or not they would come to the conference. But certainly there is a significant overweighting towards these communities at our conference. Out of the 2,000 members, of course, the majority of them are rural communities.

6566 Just broadly speaking, a third of Canada's population lives in rural and Northern remote communities. A third of our GDP is created as a result of this membership but the weighting of the membership that shows up at our annual general conference is much higher than that one-third. It's likely, I would say, closer to 60 percent of our membership that shows up at our annual conference.

6567 COMMISSIONER MacDONALD: Okay, perfect.

6568 Thank you for that clarification. I'd just like to make sure I understand the set of lenses from which I'm viewing the numbers.

6569 So in Paragraph 15 of your intervention, you note that nine percent feel that the current target of five and one is sufficient, 23 percent prefer a higher target of 10 megs, and the majority of 53 selected 25 megs.

6570 And I'm wondering if you can tell me how they arrived at those numbers? Were they check boxes on the survey? Was information provided as to what types of applications you can run at different bandwidths?

6571 MR. LOUIE: I'm just trying to flip to the survey itself. Maybe I'll just go to Daniel instead.

6572 MR. RUBINSTEIN: Sure. Hi Commissioner. We provided our delegates with the survey with several options that included the current level, the 10 megabit target, the 25 megabit target, and they were asked to speak from their experience in their community, both inside and outside while travelling.

6573 You know, we do have different types of context coming in. Some of our members are from -- working from an agricultural point of view or from an educational point of view. Some are very involved in delivery of services, so it reflects the experience that they're bringing in as they're answering the question.

6574 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay, and so the similar question, about half said that they felt that their service was inferior to their neighbours. So were they provided with a list of different bandwidths in different communities? Were they comparing themselves to their neighbours in rural and remote or northern communities? Were they comparing themselves to downtown Toronto?

6575 MR. RUBINSTEIN: Again, we asked delegates to think about their own community and where they live and think about their neighbours in that situation and how they felt their service compared, both from the speed perspective but also in the north in terms of latency, redundancy, and the other factors that we talked about in our submission.

6576 THE CHAIRPERSON: Were any of your conversations that you had either informally or formally focused on the topic of data usage and data caps?

6577 And the reason I ask is, we've heard a lot in the hearing about people wanting, you know, faster speeds, you know, higher broadband targets.

6578 But others have suggested it really doesn’t matter how big the pipe is; if you use up your data allowance in the first week of the month, you're at a bit of a loose end or facing significant charges for the rest of the month.

6579 So is that part of the conversation as well?

6580 MR. LOUIE: That's definitely part of the conversation. Great concerns in regards to the ability to access, especially in situations where we're talking about accessing for health care, for instance, and for whatever reason, the data cap is reached and then you don’t have the capacity, without significant cost, to accessing, I think, what is -- should be fundamental in the ability of Canadians to have the access to information, especially in light of the move across all levels of government for accessing of services online.

6581 And so it extends beyond health. It goes to other basic services that are being directed towards online types -- services across our nation.

6582 THE CHAIRPERSON: Obviously, more and more municipalities are trying to encourage their residents to use online applications to do things like renew licences and so forth.

6583 Is that work pretty much done in the country? From a municipal standpoint, is most of what can be put online already accessible online, or do you think we're going to continue to see the needs of customers connecting to their municipalities continue to increase for online services?

6584 MR. LOUIE: Well, I've -- the answer to that is no, the work's not done and I expect there to be a continual migration to find these types of efficiencies, in light of the fact that local government receives between 8 and 10 cents of every tax dollar, and our ability to generate additional revenues is limited, that we look continuously for efficiencies.

6585 Online technology is one of the ways that we go about providing the best value for money for our citizens and the residents. But without the capacity on the broadband bandwidth itself, it's hard for the local governments to even go down that path.

6586 There's many areas that are so slow of speed that the applications just will not run, that the amount of time that a person sitting in front of the computer waiting for the application to load makes it prohibitive, both in terms of time and the actual service is unable to be transacted as a result of the technological needs of that specific application.

6587 MR. ORB: Could I have the mic?

6588 Yeah, I'd like to just add to that. I think that there are more applications all the time that are required in, you know, across the country in the rural areas, and that in some cases, it may be that the residents have to travel. They don’t have access, you know, to the high speed internet on their own, so they have to travel. So there is a cost to that as well.

6589 And so I think it does a couple of things that really inhibits people from setting up businesses in rural areas because of the fact that they don’t have access to this. And it really is -- it puts you at a real disadvantage. I know it's something that we've heard, you know, travelling across the country, but this is something people would like to do.

6590 In some cases they're better off to locate their businesses in the rural areas because often that's where the resources are. And so it just makes common sense, but if they don’t have access to this, it stops people from doing it.

6591 And then the other thing is, you know, it can be -- it is a social issue too, because people will not move out necessarily out of the urban centres, especially the big cities.

6592 We as municipal councillors, we like to have residents come in because often our populations aren't high enough in some areas. We'd like to have more people living in our municipalities, and so -- yet especially younger families, you know, they don’t want to do that.

6593 Another thing is as well, the applications that are used now, a lot of it in the ag sector -- the agriculture as well, they need to have access to high speed because they just can't run some of this machinery. Some of the agriculture equipment itself has to have good access to high speed. If it's delivered by satellite, that can be inconsistent and sometimes it actually stops the machines from operating because the satellite will go out of commission. And so everything stops on a farm if it doesn’t pick up that signal.

6594 So they're all important issues to us.

6595 THE CHAIRPERSON: And that was actually where I was going to go next because -- and some of the questions may be difficult to answer because you're representing more than 2,000 municipalities and what's an issue in one municipality may be very different from another.

6596 But generally speaking, have any of your members been able to provide any information, perhaps through their own local Chambers of Commerce with respect to what lost opportunities or what lost business opportunities they haven't been able to take advantage of due to connectivity in the region or what it's doing to home resale prices and financial issues of that nature that are of significant importance for the community and may be being hampered due to lack of adequate connectivity today?

6597 MR. LOUIE: Well, I think the issue that comes to mind is the ability for business to locate, first of all, into rural communities with the requisite sets of fundamental pieces of business instruments that they need to be successful to compete economically, not just locally but more widely, whether it's regional, provincially, or even internationally, especially when you're trying to compete against the international world where there is better connectivity than what we have as a baseline here in Canada, especially in our rural communities.

6598 When we have the issue of attraction or retention that I spoke about earlier in my opening, where you cannot retain your youth, where we have out-migration of our youth, 20 percent, I think between -- just let me pull out the figure here so I'm accurate -- between 2007 and 2012, we were losing more than 20 percent of our youth out of our rural communities.

6599 That negates an opportunity, I think, for people to grow within their communities and grow their businesses, but it's also near impossible to attract youth and others that have experienced higher abilities of bandwidth in urban centres to move them and have them, attract them into rural centres as well.

6600 It's not just specifically to the businesses, on a business perspective, but also in regards to those same workers off work hours and having the same quality of life, especially when you're perhaps communicating with family members that live across our country.

6601 In urban centres, you can communicate around the world through FaceTime or whatever technology -- the app that you want to use. In rural communities, that's just not possible.

6602 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you for that.

6603 Some of the presenters that presented over the last few days have also indicated that the reliability of the connection is a huge issue, suffering from latency issues, quality of service issues, mean time to repair when there is an outage. Has that been highlighted as a significant issue by your members, perhaps in some of the more rural and remote regions, or is their primary focus on speed and data usage.

6604 MR. ORB: Reliability I think is a strong factor. And we’ve heard that loud and clear from our members across the country that they have to have some kind of a backup system. As I mentioned earlier on, if you relied totally on satellite signals and that was lost, if there’s no backup, in the case of a farming operation or in the case of a municipality or anybody operating a business, you would simply have to shut down.

6605 And so I think that’s a big factor. The speed is -- you know, I think you have to have something that’s reliable beyond, you know, what we have now and I think that’s the standard that we need to have at least across the country, some kind of a starting point.

6606 MR. RUBINSTEIN: Yeah. Again, I mean, it’s no different than in an urban area where, you know, you might subscribe to a certain speed and your level of service will fluctuate over time depending on the technology that you’re working with. And that happens in rural areas as well. And especially in the north, the lack of redundancy is top of mind in rural areas with fixed wireless as you have more folks come on with a single site and before the next tower comes in, you know, you are going to have service impacts.

6607 So we certainly hear that from different contexts depending on the level of service and speed that you’re starting with. But the quality I think is just as much an issue as the speed itself.

6608 MR. LOUIE: But just to add, it’s important, I think, that whatever is decided in terms of changes to the regs, that it be responsive to the changing environment that we’re working under as well, that the technological draw on a system will change very quickly.

6609 And so what we’re advocating for is that the changes that are made are responsive to the conditions that will be coming. Your question earlier was, “Have we satisfied the need or satisfied the migration of e-business online in terms of permitting and such even at a local government level?” and the answer was, “No.”

6610 And given that, that we need to be proactive in writing in place and setting in place a construct that can continue to serve, and not set just minimal levels but be thinking forward to when we need additional capacities, and the only way to do that and be competitive as a nation is to set in place a framework that makes this possible going forward.

6611 COMMISSIONER MacDONALD: You’ve mentioned satellite a couple of times and we’ve heard a number of different proposals that basically run the entire spectrum saying that whatever the approach should be it should be technology-neutral, realizing what the costs would be to run fibre to Iqaluit, for example, and whether or not that would be practical, all the way up to other intervenors saying that even certain networks like cable are now legacy and everything should be all fibre all the time.

6612 And I’m wondering, can you speak to that? Because you have mentioned your concerns about your reliability of satellites. If the service is reliable, do Canadians care the method by which they get the service or is it just the service and the quality they’re concerned about, regardless of whether it’s fixed wireless or satellite or fibre or cable or what have you?

6613 MR. LOUIE: Well, I think the question appears to focus on a point in time. If the answer is that it’s reliable consistently today and into the future, then the answer is no, there’s no issue with that. But I think that if you’re choosing a specific technology today and it’s reliable but it may not be into the future, then that’s not responsive to, I think, what Canadians need to continue to be competitive.

6614 And so we are concerned that by choosing one over another specific today, that it may not necessarily meet the needs going forward. And that’s why we’re saying at a conceptual level we should set minimum standards of service and ensure that it continues to be reviewed in a fashion where it’s responsive to the environment of the day in terms of need.

6615 COMMISSIONER MacDONALD: Okay, thank you.

6616 Just to change direction for a few minutes. We all know that the federal and provincial governments and territorial governments have invested significant dollars in building out broadband infrastructure to more Canadians. There was the Connecting Canadians initiative last year of over $300 million, and in the most recent federal budget more money has been invested.

6617 Can you speak to how much of that funding -- it doesn’t need to be an exact number, obviously, but how much you feel has made its way into the rural and remote communities that you represent as part of your membership versus what’s been spent on other projects and what difference that has made to date?

6618 MR. ORB: I can only tell you, I guess, regionally what I know that has happened or is happening in Saskatchewan. And to my knowledge, that has been expanding or it’s facilitated the expanding of our high-speed broadband into the rural areas. But those were only around the urban centres.

6619 And so those would be mostly towns that have received that kind of funding. And we work in Saskatchewan; we work with SaksTel, of course, you know? We hope to work together with them more in the future to perhaps expand the network of high-speed broadband.

6620 But the problem is it doesn’t actually get into the rural areas because it doesn’t have the capability to reach out much more out of the towns, yeah, where the towers are themselves. So the rural areas, they rely on satellite transmissions. They are overloaded often because there is so much data being picked up that they are overloaded and they’re just not reliable.

6621 So maybe Raymond can speak to other parts of the country, but I’m only familiar with Saskatchewan.

6622 MR. LOUIE: Well, clearly there’s, I think, a recognition that there’s less than adequate service in parts of our country and hence the initial $305 million investment and now the subsequent 500 million by this new government.

6623 What I would say is that the need continues to grow. The initial application or the allocation is still is, I think, about two years behind schedule of getting out into the field. And the world is evolving even now. And so when we’re challenged by this evolving framework that we’re working under, we need to move more quickly on this and looking for ways to provide the service that’s necessary.

6624 The rural communities are consistently speaking to us, as the organization that represents them, to put as much effort into this as possible. That’s why I said it was a major concern of the FCMs and continues to be that when our rural communities, like I said, represent a third of Canada’s population and a third of GDP and they’re not competitive. I think that puts as at an economic disadvantage when competing with just south of the border with the United States.

6625 COMMISSIONER MacDONALD: Obviously when you’re running a municipality you have a long list of priorities and things that need to be funded.

6626 I know we’ve seen situations in, I won’t say the largest centres in the country but larger communities than many of the ones we’re talking about today, where they have taken of their own resources and either partnered with local service providers or perhaps built out their own fibre-optic infrastructure to service their community.

6627 Have any of those similar types of investments been made in some of your smaller communities?

6628 MR. LOUIE: Well, speaking more broadly, I think that there’s a willingness of some municipalities in some capacity, but more often than not there just isn’t the capacity.

6629 As I highlighted earlier, given the fact that 50 percent of your tax dollar goes to the federal government, 40 percent generally goes to provincial and territorial, and only between 8 and 10 cents goes to local government, our ability to invest into these types of projects is limited. You know, earlier there was comments of roads and bridges and other core infrastructure, which are also very important.

6630 These things are what we focus on generally, but we know that it’s not just these core infrastructures that are necessary to provide the quality of life for Canadians, that we need these types of services in order to maintain and compete and, in fact, excel in communities.

6631 So our capacity to pay I think is limited, but there’s a willingness to contribute but it comes, I think, at a local decision-making basis.

6632 There will be instances where local communities will want to make that investment because they see it as the priority, and others that have perhaps higher priorities because of other needs they’ll make those other types of investments.

6633 But I think at the basic level, an investment needs to be made at a national level for a core backbone so that when the decision is made at a local government level or provincial level, regional, to connect, that they can make that more limited scope of investment to connect to that backbone. If the backbone is not there, the cost of course is prohibitive because you need to traverse such a large geographical area.

6634 COMMISSIONER MacDONALD: So in your view, if we took an approach whereby our focus coming under this proceeding was to be focused on building that backbone between the unserved and underserved areas of the country; do you think that would be adequate to allow either new providers, existing providers, or municipalities to pick up the torch from there and then ensure the end last mile connectivity out to the constituents in their particular community?

6635 MR. LOUIE: It would certainly be a good start. That is not of course the end of the equation. And I’ll revisit the capacity to pay of local government.

6636 But this will require a partnership of all orders of government, of the private sector, and the consumer to take up the pieces of financing that’s necessary to build the complete system. What we’re saying is that at a fundamental level there needs to be more investment at the backbone and that access is key for us to be competitive. Without even that initial piece you cannot stimulate and motivate and attract the investment that’s necessary for that last kilometre with your investment.

6637 Daniel?

6638 MR. RUBINSTEIN: Just to add, I think it’s important to remember that part of having a basic service, part of the barrier is last mile access and part of the barrier is that backbone. So whatever measures the Commission takes, having taken into account what the market can do itself, what the federal government can bring to bear with its resources, at the end of the day, if there are barriers from both sides that are impeding that minimum level, then the Commission would need to address that.

6639 And there may be municipal partners in delivering some of those solutions within a funding framework. But again, waiting that lag over time is the challenge that comes to us at FCM. We hear from rural councillors, from mayors, from reeves about -- we know funding programs exist; we’re still in a multi-year lag on what’s available through the system that exists today to have telecom development in closer to urban centres.

6640 COMMISSIONER MacDONALD: I’ve never held office with municipalities so I honestly don’t know the answer to this question. So take it in that light. But it comes down to a point where you touched on, you know, prioritization of different funds that may be available.

6641 And I’m wondering if some of your municipalities or if it’s even a possibility for them to ask for broadband funding from one of these different pots of money? I mean, obviously there’s infrastructure funding, be it at a provincial or federal level, that you can apply for for roads or sewer or water services, building a convention centre, new sports complex, what have you.

6642 Do such funds that exist out there allow you to apply for, you know, “No, we’ll defer the convention centre for 10 years. We want to put our priority and put our ask towards building of broadband infrastructure.”

6643 MR. LOUIE: The landscape changes at the provincial and territorial level; I can’t speak to exactly what the environment will be at that level. But I can say at the federal level there is access to a broad range of tools.

6644 It does come down to what we believe is appropriate local choice on whether or not to have that convention centre deferred for 10 years, as you described, in favour of this type of investment.

6645 But it is important, I think, to maintain that individual local government choice to make those priorities because of course there’s many other decisions that were made in tandem with that type of decision. Whether or not over the years that they’ve invested appropriately for water and waste-water infrastructure, and thereby allocating funding, and there’s no money left over in order to make this type of investment, they’ve taken care of the basics, for instance. And for those that have done so, they should not be punished for doing the right thing over the years and in favour of those that perhaps have deferred that type of standard maintenance.

6646 COMMISSIONER MacDONALD: Okay.

6647 Just changing over to affordability and the cost of service for a minute. I note in your survey that about a quarter of respondents said that cost was a barrier to them signing up for broadband service or if they had signed up they still felt it was too expensive.

6648 Did they outline what they feel an affordable rate would be and does that change based on the geography? Do more remote Canadians naturally expect to pay a little bit more than their urban counterparts? What did they feel a just rate was, at least for a basic connectivity service? And if you didn’t ask the question, that’s fine.

6649 MR. LOUIE: Well, I don’t think we did ask the question but I think there’s the general recognition that our rural folks, our membership is reasonable in understanding that there’s a higher cost associated and that an additional investment needs to be made on their part. On the ongoing service provision it would be, I think, important for us to understand that some parity is what would be desire for our membership and for Canadians across the country.

6650 Like I described earlier, it should be understood that in today’s day and age with technology being fundamental to our quality of life on so many different aspects, whether it be education, business, you know, arts and entertainment, these types of things, and just pure functionality of your daily life, that this level of service should be equated to other basic services. And so access to it of course relates to how much money it will ultimately cost.

6651 A bit more might be acceptable with an understanding that it’s less efficient, perhaps, but ultimately moving to a parity-type model is preferable.

6652 COMMISSIONER MacDONALD: Was there any discussion around if a build does need to take place -- it’s obvious I think we can all agree it will have a significant price tag attached to it. Was there any discussion or do you have any thoughts around who should be responsible for paying for that? Is it the federal government? Is it additional charges being levied on service providers that they will in turn pass on to their customers? Do you have any thoughts on that topic?

6653 MR. LOUIE: Well, it’s in addition. We’re advocating that this would be in addition to the basic service, that in fact there would be a levy. But it’s not exclusive to just that stream of funding that would be made available.

6654 Federal government, provincial government, local government would all play a role as part of the overall funding strategy. The determination of what the cost will be will be indicated by the types of technologies, the scope and reach of the implement itself.

6655 And so we’ll look quite carefully at each different application and depending on what is being asked for, what’s being desired in that jurisdiction and decided ultimately through consultation with local government and provincial, federal, and the service provider, that will determine what sort of funding and mix I think will come into play.

6656 COMMISSIONER MacDONALD: So just so I’m clear on that, you would see each of the consumers across the country paying a little bit more to ensure that everyone had a quality access to broadband services? We had the Affordable Access Coalition in yesterday and they suggested for about, you know, $1.50 per month per subscriber would equate to about $400 million a year in additional funding to put towards a funding mechanism of some kind. Is that what you have in mind?

6657 MR. LOUIE: What we say at the FCM is that we’re in it together, that we are a nation that is attempting to improve the quality of life of everyone in Canada. Part of that equation is paying to ensure that everyone has access to succeed. And in this instance here, we’re also saying that the inclusion as part of basic service is appropriate.

6658 Daniel?

6659 MR. RUBINSTEIN: Yeah. If I could just add, I mean, I know there’s been in a conversation in questions to the Affordable Access Coalition yesterday about the role of the federal government. I think we’re quite pleased to have a federal government that’s investing. And certainly the market forces that exist and the federal government’s investments need to be considered first as part of any decision on where there needs to be that application of a BSO through levies and then a subsidy out.

6660 You know, that does have to work together and I think we’ve been very much involved in making sure that the federal government is involved as an active funding party. I’m pleased with the commitments in the budget.

6661 COMMISSIONER MacDONALD: Yeah, go right ahead.

6662 MR. ORB: If I could just add onto that, I think we look at it, and you should look at it, in the rural areas as an investment. I think the country would look at it that way too. And I would hope that the federal government looks at it as an investment not only for what we need to catch up on, but perhaps into the future.

6663 So I think it will help in some ways to stimulate our economy a bit if it allows people to do people, you know, more efficiently and to progress. I think it’s a public good when an investment is made in that magnitude. And we were very happy when we saw it in the budget. And of course we told the federal government that we were pleased with that announcement and all the other announcements that the government has made up until now.

6664 COMMISSIONER MacDONALD: Perfect.

6665 Just one final question and it’s something we touched on earlier when we were talking about the migration of, well, be they municipal, provincial, or federal services, migrating those services online.

6666 Providing a printed copy of the directory listings is in the current basic service obligation. Given that we are moving so much into this online world, do you have any opinions on whether a printed phone book is still actually required, and how your municipalities may still use or advertise in the phone book to allow people to connect to your various municipal departments?

6667 MR. LOUIE: We, of the SCM, I don’t believe have taken any formal position. I don’t think I'm prepared to speak on behalf of all of the membership.

6668 Daniel?

6669 MR. RUBINSTEIN: And more generally, not that specific question, but I think again, it goes to the quality of service that we can expect and rural residents can expect from Wireline right now.

6670 And that's one of the services that has been relied on, so as we transition, it's important to maintain that consistency and quality of service.

6671 MR. LOUIE: But if it was to be eliminated, then there needs to be an equivalency of serviced that's provided and that the -- increasing the importance that broadband service be made available so they can access that same type of information in a likely refreshed and even better service model than what is currently being provided. But you can't just reduce that access to information.

6672 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay, thank you. Oh, sorry, go ahead.

6673 MR. RUBINSTEIN: Just to give an example, at the federal level, we included in our supplementary request to some of your questions about an example from the Federal Department of Fisheries, which was moving towards a licensing system that was only available online.

6674 Well, we hear about this where the federal boys said "local government" and our members say, "Well, we can't access this service."

6675 And they’ve been told at the federal level to go to the nearest Service Canada office, which isn't in their neighbourhood.

6676 So this is that question of timing and the gap as services progress that often -- you know, it's a valid question about municipal services, but I'd say it's even bigger at the federal and provincial level, the speed at which that's moving and how our broadband system is either caught up or in a lag, and we've been in a lag to this point.

6677 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay, thank you very much. Those are my questions.

6678 Vice-Chair Menzies.

6679 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: I just have a question for the politicians, because we don’t get them a lot and I know, especially municipal politicians are probably as close as anyone to the concerns of everyday life.

6680 A couple of the submissions we've had this week could end up adding a couple of dollars a month to people's internet bills and because I've got both a rural representative here from Saskatchewan, I believe, and big city Vancouver, I'd like to hear from you both about, given other shifts in public policy in various places, do you think people are comfortable paying a little extra on their internet bills to manage some of these projects?

6681 UNKNOWN SPEAKER: And we have to answer in a way that says that will be manageable for you in the future.

6682 UNKNOWN SPEAKER: Yeah.

6683 MR. ORB: You know, it's a good question, first of all, but I think even though people fill out the surveys and they say, you know, that expense is a big part of, you know, doing business, it's a concern.

6684 But I think the reliability is very important and the consistency of the broadband itself is really important to people that live in the rural areas.

6685 It's important to the municipalities as well, because we already do a lot of things online and if we don’t have access to that, I know some of the rural municipal offices, we represent 296 rural municipalities. That's all the municipalities in Saskatchewan.

6686 And a good part of those offices are in the rural areas and they -- it's very slow, it's very tedious, it's -- sometimes administrators have to go somewhere else to do their day-to-day business. It might be going to an urban centre. So it puts them at a real disadvantage and it's a very costly expedition, I guess, or venture.

6687 And some of the things we're also trying to do, one -- there is a program that actually we're working on in Saskatchewan now, and it's going to be delivered through Saskatchewan Government Insurance, and it's called -- it's a primary permitting system.

6688 So what it will do is, it will allow the trucking industry to be able to apply online for permits so (inaudible) they can do their work often on the weekends or in the evenings when offices in Regina are closed. And so they can tap right into the website and they can get the information right online. They will have. like, actually, an interactive map and they'll be able to trace their route.

6689 So that would be something we're looking forward to in the very near future of actually happening in Saskatchewan.

6690 And the other thing that we're trying to do is, we're trying -- and this is really a -- more of a safety thing, because it has to do with emergency services like ambulance and police and fire protection, and they're trying to identify all the rural yard sites sites where people are living so if there is a fire or an accident, those services have to get to those places. And because they use GPS it has to be a reliable system.

6691 And so those are ---

6692 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: If people got all that they'd be comfortable paying a couple more dollars a month for it? We're back to the original question.

6693 MR. ORB: Yeah, I -- you see, that's hard to answer on behalf of the rural population totally, but I think right now they would be happy because a lot of them don’t have any high speed right now. So you see ---

6694 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Thank you.

6695 MR. ORB: --- they're going from really zero to something that's maybe a little bit more money, but I think they would be happy if they had it.

6696 MR. LOUIE: Vice-Chairman Menzies, thank you, first of all, for recognizing that local government is the closest to its people.

6697 And to answer your question more directly, I think the answer is yes. How you stated was, "a little more money," and I think that's an appropriate descriptor.

6698 I think an incremental increase that allows better access, not just to the people that live in rural Canada, but access for the rest of Canada that frankly, moves around our country. When I go on vacation and I travel across the country and I'm moving through a rural area, it would be nice to be able to stay connected. And having the access wherever I go gives me the confidence that I can still be able to conduct business.

6699 When I was waiting for my opportunity here today to present to you, I downloaded -- must be a couple of gigs worth of data that I have to read on my plane ride back to Vancouver. And had I not had that opportunity, I'd be less efficient being able to do my job in Vancouver.

6700 And so this is the type of, I think, scenario where I think will play out for many across Canada when they are paying slightly more, but having better access and consistency of service. It makes us all, I think, a little more efficient and we're willing to pay for that.

6701 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Thank you. Safe travels.

6702 THE CHAIRPERSON: I hope you used our free Wi-Fi available in the hearing room.

6703 Commissioner Vennard first -- next. Thanks.

6704 COMMISIONER VENNARD: I have a couple of questions for you, and they have to do with numbers.

6705 Now, you’ve -- you say that you have about 2,000 -- you represent about 2,000 municipalities and communities. I'm wondering, of those communities, roughly -- you might not know the answer to this, but hopefully you'll have some idea. How many, if any, of those are planning on community networks? Has anybody got anything in the planning stage? No?

6706 MR. LOUIE: No, we don’t have that data for you, sorry.

6707 COMMISSIONER VENNARD: Okay, and I'm wondering, because if you were in Edmonton you certainly would have heard of the community of Olds in Alberta?

6708 And so we spent a lot of time looking at barriers and trying to identify things that are getting in the way. And another way to look at things, there's something that actually worked there. They made that model work for them. They've got a gig up and a gig down. So that's something too that -- was that ever discussed at any of your meetings or anything like that? Have you thought about that?

6709 MR. LEBLANC: Well, Olds is a great example of municipal leadership in terms of delivering broadband at high speeds to rural residents but ultimately it was a success because there was leadership from higher levels of government so they were able to tap into the Alberta SuperNet, transport infrastructure to be able to deliver those services.

6710 COMMISSIONER VENNARD: Yeah. It was also a success just because of the nature of the community and the champions that they had in the community that wanted to move that forward, the point being that there is a model of success there that might work for other communities as well.

6711 The second question that I have is along the same lines. Of your 2,000 communities, how many of them are organizing into regional networks?

6712 We heard the EORN model the other day, the Eastern Ontario Regional Network model. Do you have any -- do you know anything about that? And here again, I'm just asking for your perceptions on that or your knowledge, if you have it.

6713 MR. RUBINSTEIN: Sure. There certainly are regions in the country that are organizing, like EORN. We're aware of other proposals in the works that again, they're all contingent on accessing funding and hearing -- my understanding of EORN's testimony as well, spoke about the fact that the speeds at which that network were rolled out at are ones that have evolved considerably since the rollout and they’re now looking at, “How do we take that next step?”

6714 So you know, that’s part of the reason that absolutely there will be cases where municipalities will be directly part of providing service in a given community or region. But at a national level we need to have that expanded BSO at whatever basic speed target the Commission would set. And perhaps either municipalities will be part of delivering that or taking a next step in providing more advanced service the way Olds has on top of that.

6715 COMMISSIONER VENNARD: Yeah. Roughly how many regional networks would you say are in the emergent stage within the 2,000 communities roughly that you represent?

6716 MR. RUBINSTEIN: Again, it’s not a conclusive number but I’m really only aware of a few.

6717 COMMISSIONER VENNARD: A few? Okay, thank you.

6718 THE CHAIRPERSON: Commissioner Molnar?

6719 COMMISSIONER MOLNAR: Thank you.

6720 And there’s so many questions I could ask but I’m going to limit myself very much.

6721 And the first is really, it’s a follow-up to the question by Vice-Chair Menzies in asking whether or not you view that persons within your constituencies, within your municipalities would support a change or an increase to their bills to support this.

6722 My question is a little more directed to the position you put forward in how you were able to vet through both your urban and rural municipalities that this was the position. So in stating that you want a subscriber-funded infrastructure fund put forward, what was the manner in which you vetted this through your urban municipalities to support the rural?

6723 MR. LOUIE: So at the highest level, 2,000 member municipalities of the FCM, that equates to 20,000, or thereabouts, local government officials in our membership. Our membership board at the FCM is a 74-member board.

6724 We came to a unanimous position in our budget submission to the federal government and our election platform, which asked for investment into rural broadband. And it was a unanimous decision of our board.

6725 Prior to coming to that unanimous decision of the board, we worked through a subcommittee framework where we have extensive conversations about RS and more specifically on the subject of rural broadband, which has been discussed over numerous successive board meetings over the years, expressing our desire for additional federal investments.

6726 As part of those discussions there was also the recognition that there would be a share of costs associated with that that would spread through a range of funding partners, including additional costs at the subscriber level.

6727 COMMISSIONER MOLNAR: Thank you.

6728 MR. ORB: If I could add onto that, the rural forum itself is made up of many rural members, rural municipalities from across the country. But they’re also made up of urban municipalities as well, some of the smaller cities, which is important.

6729 And I think that FCM promotes, you know, the cities, the communities, the RMs all working together on these issues. And I think because it became a high priority of FCM, I think it really is kind of a success story when you can think about cities that already have in some cases high-speed broadband access promoting that, you know, to the rest of the country.

6730 Because I think they realize that’s one of the strengths that FCM has, is we have people from all across the country and very diverse municipalities, you know, some from the north as well. And those people are remote and in some ways more related to the rural. But because we’ve got cities and villages and towns in our organization I think it bodes well for FCM and I think for the country as well.

6731 COMMISSIONER MOLNAR: Thank you.

6732 And you have designated broadband as sort of a separate advocacy issue. But would you say normally that it would be considered part of infrastructure? Or do you always consider it separate and distinct?

6733 MR. LOUIE: Well, because it’s not directly within our jurisdiction, the majority of infrastructure is not held by local government. It’s not one of our traditional areas that we focus on.

6734 Recognizing that 60 percent of Canada’s infrastructure is held or controlled by local government, this is not a historical, traditional area that we would control. But you know, given some of the conversations that we’ve had, we understand that it’s always about a partnership, that there’s rights of way that need to be had. And part of that equation is local government.

6735 COMMISSIONER MOLNAR: I mean, we know that there have been many rural and urban municipalities who have contributed investments towards expanding broadband at various levels and speeds and technologies and so on. And we also know that you do a lot of activity in infrastructure-building outside of broadband.

6736 As an organization do you provide your members with any kind of best practices, P-3 best practices, or anything else?

6737 MR. LOUIE: Absolutely. We have a number of different initiatives that underway in terms of asset management. We have our LAMP program, which is run through the Green Municipal Fund, which is a federally funded program which just recently received additional funding from the federal government. It’s a half-a-billion-dollar fund that we have low-interest-rate loans and grants to local government that was vested to us from the federal government and more recently another 125 million.

6738 The federal government of course has also allocated $50 million-worth of asset management moneys to us as part of this last budget, along with 75 additional million dollars for climate adaptation.

6739 As part of that framework we inject moneys and invest moneys into local government. Part of that investment requires a benchmarking and reporting back on how those projects were implemented and learning experiences from those specific projects, which in turn are then shared through our membership to other local governments and made available more widely to anyone that wants to access them on our website at the GMF.

6740 COMMISSIONER MOLNAR: Okay, I’m actually on your website. So if I was to look in here I would find your best practices?

6741 MR. LOUIE: You should be able to find it. Specific to each of the projects, you should be able to find on there whether or not they met the original intention that was set out, how they performed. And then based on that you can determine whether or not that type of implement or technology that they’ve invested in makes sense for you.

6742 COMMISSIONER MOLNAR: Okay, let me maybe restate. That might be a little different than what I was thinking of.

6743 MR. LOUIE: Okay.

6744 COMMISSIONER MOLNAR: I mean, there is a request for an additional fund and there’s also been a lot of recognition, you know, by different parties that any ultimate plan that will fully extend broadband requires participation by the private sector and by various levels of government involvement, municipalities, provinces, whether it be the CRTC or federal government or both.

6745 But there’s a partnership here to get to an outcome. And so that kind of partnership I just wondered, you know, would require some guiding principles. To be at its most effective, it requires effective principles in structure, in disciplines and so on.

6746 Now, you’ve participated in many P-3 types of projects through infrastructure and otherwise. I just wondered if you had somewhere, sort of, those guiding principles, policies, structures, disciplines?

6747 MR. RUBINSTEIN: So certainly as president Louie was talking about we share best practices for infrastructure management generally. And that would include three different types of procurement. If you’re asking if that in the telecom space in particular we’ve provided support to members in dealing with municipal access issues has been an area of focus as well as in (inaudible). And we’ve advocated both at the federal level and with the Commission on broadband access.

6748 COMMISSIONER MOLNAR: Thank you.

6749 MR. ORB: Perhaps if you ---

6750 THE CHAIRPERSON: Yes, please.

6751 MR. ORB: If you don’t mind I’d just maybe just like to add onto that. I don’t know if what you’re thinking of is specifically what’s happening right now with different levels of government and municipalities working together. You know, for us, especially for me, this is a bit of a learning curve, to learn what other jurisdictions are doing in a model, you know, that happened at Olds. We looked at that and when I read about that it was news to me.

6752 And I think it’s a good model to follow. I know they’re doing some good things here in Ontario as well.

6753 Our members of course would be educated on that the same way we are. And so I think if there’s something that works across the country, you know, some basic kind of plan, I think that’s the kind of message we’ll get across to our members. And I think that will be helpful.

6754 COMMISSIONER MOLNAR: Yes, thank you. And it looks like an organization such as yours is a great way of communicating those successful initiatives and, you know, what was the structure and discipline and how did that occur. Thank you.

6755 MR. ORB: And if I just could add just a bit onto that, at our annual general meetings, we have workshops, we have some plenary sessions there and we bring people in, we bring experts beyond, you know, what we can deliver to our members, but those are the kind of things that we can talk about at those forums to bring experts in from across the country and bring perhaps, you know, the community of Olds most likely will be there.

6756 And perhaps in the future we can look at listening to them and educating our members that way. Nothing like learning first hand from the people that are doing it, you know.

6757 MR. LOUIE: Maybe just to describe the GMF process a little more to you on who’s on that board. It’s a 15-member board. Five members are local government members, five members are private sector, sector experts, five members are federal government representatives and they are director general of representatives.

6758 And so the screening of the projects goes to that GMF council for recommendations to the FCM board of directors or our executive for final approval. But even before that, there’s a peer review process to determine from sector experts specific to the project that then in turn gives their comments for the council’s consideration and whether or not to fund that type of project.

6759 And subsequent to that, then as I described, there’s a reporting back on whether or not that specific project met target or not and how -- or exceeded target, in some instances, on things like water reduction, greenhouse gas emissions, and other targets that energy reduction, these are the types of things that they would be each focusing on because it’s a green fund is what the intent of this is.

6760 The asset management pilot project that I spoke of also is still working its way through. And the intention of that is to provide best practices and show through examples of multiple sizes of local government how to go about -- go to invest in these types of projects. And this certainly is applicable to situation where we would be investing into broadband.

6761 THE CHAIRPERSON: Just one final question, Mr. Orb, and it relates less to your functions as -- at the forum and more as your knowledge of Saskatchewan. I don’t know if you’ve had a chance to look at our broadband map that we put online a few days ago, but just from looking at it, there’s a striking difference between the situation in rural Alberta and rural Saskatchewan.

6762 And I was wondering from your perspective if you could explain that difference and I’m going to speculate it may obviously be linked almost directly to the SuperNet. Would you agree with that?

6763 MR. ORB: I haven’t seen the map as such, but I know -- I have been informed of what happens -- what has happened in Alberta, you know, there is a particular -- one company that’s been delivering high-speed Internet in Saskatchewan. It is -- SaskTel is more responsible for that, although there are satellite companies that are doing the same.

6764 And so we’re interested to know what Saskatchewan will be doing. And we have scheduled a meeting very near -- in the very near future to talk to SaskTel about that to be able to -- hopefully to be able to work together with them.

6765 Because, you know, in a lot of ways, you know, we’re similar to Alberta, especially rural. We have like a large oil and gas industry. We have lots of ranch land. We have some places where there is no coverage now. There’s no cellphone coverage either, especially on the southern part of the province. And so we see some similarities there.

6766 And I guess, quite frankly, it’s a bit of a concern for us that we don’t have the good coverage there. So I think we want to be -- we wanted to learn quickly how we can improve that in Saskatchewan.

6767 THE CHAIRPERSON: Right.

6768 MR. RUBINSTEIN: And, excuse me, sorry.

6769 THE CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

6770 MR. RUBINSTEIN: Just building on that too. I think service differences, when you look at across the country for example between Saskatchewan and Alberta, I think it’s an excellent example of why we as FCM are looking to the federal government now for leadership in terms of addressing some of those gaps in broadband coverage.

6771 And ultimately it’s not a matter of just investing in last mile solutions like the connecting Canadians program has done a great example of, but also in that advanced transportation infrastructure that will help deliver evolving telecommunications services.

6772 MR. LOUIE: Mr. Chairman, just to let you know, your map doesn’t load on my iPad.

6773 THE CHAIRPERSON: Well prob -- that’s not unusual. I appreciate that feedback.

6774 The other similarity, of course, between Saskatchewan and Alberta is that everybody seems to wear green at football games as well, at CFL games even in Alberta. But that’s -- all right. Well, thank you very much for having traveled here and participating in our hearings. There’s other stages.

6775 Now, we have a video conference for one last intervenor, so we’ll take a short break for about 10 minutes. We’ll reconvene at 3:15. Thank you.

--- Upon recessing at 3:06 p.m.

--- Upon resuming 3:18 p.m.

6776 LE PRÉSIDENT: À l’ordre s’il vous plaît. Madame la secrétaire.

6777 THE SECRETARY: Thank you. We will now hear the presentation of Manitoba Keewa -- okay, sorry -- Keewatinowi Okimakinak Inc. with appearing by videoconference from the Winnipeg CRTC office, please introduce yourself and your colleague and you have 15 minutes. Thank you.

PRESENTATION

6778 MS. FENSKE: Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission. My name is Allison Fenske and I’m legal counsel to Manitoba Keewatinowi Okimakinak Inc., or MKO, in these proceedings.

6779 I’m joined by Ms. Catherine Dolay (ph), who is a student at law with the Public Interest Law Centre.

6780 Can you hear me okay? Is everything ---

6781 THE CHAIRPERSON: We hear and see you just fine and please go ahead.

6782 MS. FENSKE: Perfect. Thank you.

6783 On behalf of MKO, which represents 30 northern Manitoba First Nations and over 65,000 First Nations citizens, I would like to thank the Commission for the opportunity to provide brief comments here today.

6784 I’m also thankful to be able to join you remotely from Treaty 1 territory. MKO works to support and promote the interests of First Nations by achieving autonomy and self-sufficiency with respect to all areas that affect the lives of northern First Nations citizens.

6785 In terms of telecommunications, this translates to a desire to see the unique barriers faced by remote First Nations addressed. These barriers include extremely high cost to serve, higher volume of traffic per connection, and acute challenges associated with the subscriber-based systems, among other issues.

6786 MKO is particularly concerned with how the CRTC can assist in ensuring that the unique barriers faced by First Nations are addressed in a way that ensures the full participation of First Nations citizens in an increasingly digital economy.

6787 MKO First Nations have had to deal with substandard plain old telephone services, POTS, and wireless services for years. POTS can become overloaded, preventing telephone calls from coming in or out of the community. This has a real impact on MKO citizens.

6788 For example, it can mean that MKO citizens are not able to call the RCMP or reach a nursing station or Telehealth in an emergency. Outdated communications infrastructure is often vulnerable to severe weather, which in term can make responding to service calls difficult. This is particularly so when service providers do not have any local representation.

6789 In some communities, the infrastructure for wireless service does not exist and cellular services are simply not available.

6790 Rather than being cut off entirely from communications, both inside and outside the community, individuals turned to the Internet in an attempt to circumvent the substantial deficiencies of other kinds of telecommunications services.

6791 The opportunities available through broadband Internet services are significantly more far reaching than what POTS offers. Many interveners, including MKO, have pointed to the potential for better access to broadband Internet to not only improve access to health, education and social services, but to also increase economic opportunities.

6792 Over the three decades since the Internet was first developed in 1983, it has evolved from being a research tool used by a few sophisticated researchers to an essential tool for interacting with business, government, friends and family.

6793 Quality, affordable broadband internet is now a basic requirement for full participation in the digital economy. In the future, it will become even more critical as alternatives become less accessible.

6794 The CRTC’s basic service objective must reflect the essential nature of broadband internet services and the needs of all consumers.

6795 The experiences of those living in MKO First Nations shows that market forces and current government funding initiatives have failed First Nations in northern communities. These initiatives have not been enough to ensure that high quality, reliable, and affordable broadband internet is accessible to many of the northern First Nations in Manitoba. In fact, they have not been sufficient to achieve minimum service standards.

6796 As you will have seen in MKO’s Further Intervention, MKO recently undertook a community survey to highlight the experiences of northern First Nation governments and their citizens. The results of these surveys tell us a lot, not only about the needs of communities, but also about the responsiveness of the market to date.

6797 Community leaders spoke of some providers relegating their communities to a very low priority, and citizens facing unreliable or awful service. The surveys found that some individuals were waiting three months for a simple installation, or dealing with service outages for six weeks at a time. That’s not six hours or six days, but six weeks. And during this kind of six-week delay, First Nation governments and businesses had to return to manual processes and employees were not able to take the holidays that they were otherwise entitled to. People would have been prevented from working online and otherwise communicating with loved ones.

6798 The magnitude of these challenges is unheard of and would not be acceptable to people living in urban centres or even some southern rural areas.

6799 When MKO citizens do have access to the internet, it’s overwhelmingly slow, unreliable, and overburdened. Because of the remote nature of many of these communities, MKO citizens feel cut off from the rest of the world. The inaccessible internet services further isolates MKO citizens.

6800 Our community survey findings are consistent with the EKOS 2016 survey commissioned for the CRTC, which identified some of the limitations and barriers faced by residents of rural and remote areas as a result of unreliable and inferior internet service.

6801 In some findings at page 71, EKOS reports:

6802 “As such, rural Canadians see themselves as being at a considerable disadvantage by remaining in a rural area. Without reliable and adequate access to the Internet, rural residents express feelings of vulnerability due to lack of access to health and essential services, education, economic participation, knowledge of current events, and social needs to mitigate isolation.”

6803 There are real and significant disadvantages faced by Canadians who do not have reliable and adequate access to the internet.

6804 These kinds of disadvantages are compounded for MKO First Nations by the realistics and realities of many remote and isolated First Nation communities. Increasing social isolation and economic exclusion has profound effects in communities that are already experiencing high rates of poverty, unemployment, and high indicators for poor health.

6805 We can see the consequences of persistent social and economic exclusion and isolation in the most recent suicide epidemics faced by a number of First Nations, including MKO First Nations.

6806 Let’s consider for a moment the kind of frustrations residents of an urban centre may encounter with their internet services. As one example, residents of an urban centre might find themselves cut off from or dealing with limited internet access if they went on a camping trip. For some, a camping trip might be an opportunity to unplug given how intertwined our daily lives are with the internet these days.

6807 In some cases, when work needs to be done during a camping trip, the signal at the camp site might be weak and a search for higher ground and a few more bars is required. If you can’t find a stronger signal, it may be impossible to send emails or conduct work accordingly. For residents of an urban centre, this experience is an exercise in frustration. However, when these residents return home, they are able to catch up on work and their life goes on. If they choose to, they can return camping to unplug again at a later time.

6808 For many First Nation communities these frustrations are not temporary, or sought after for a break from it all. They can be unanticipated and a real drain on one’s ability to go about very important daily tasks, work, schooling, banking, shopping, accessing health or other government services. They are not an exercise in choice.

6809 MKO citizens find creative ways to adjust to the limitations of unreliable connectivity in their First Nations as best they can. For example, gathering at community hotspots or access pools because they don’t have an internet connection at home, waking up in the middle of the night to use the internet when there is less community traffic, or otherwise planning their day around their best chance at a reliable connection is a kind of hedging that is a regular occurrence for many MKO citizens. These activities would be intolerable to the camper in our earlier example upon returning to the city, but they are necessary in northern First Nations.

6810 And with that even adequate internet access, inadequate internet has become a necessity.

6811 Notwithstanding the difficulties in internet access and service level and quality, many MKO citizens are passing over traditional telecommunications services like POTS in favour of adapting to the use of the internet to meet basic technological needs.

6812 Given the particular social isolation in northern First Nation communities, it must be noted that 100 percent of our survey respondents use the internet to connect with friends and family. This must be understood within the context of the unique socio-economic conditions and family ties within First Nation communities. There is a high level of movement between First Nations and urban centres which is necessary given the lack of essential services in northern First Nations.

6813 There can and should not be any hierarchy of internet uses. One might be tempted to view the use of social media as entertainment or as a want versus a need. However, for isolated communities where family members are often separated by great distance in pursuit of better educational, employment, and health opportunities, social media is a crucial tool for maintaining necessary and positive family connections.

6814 In addition to maintaining specific family ties, almost half of our survey respondents use the internet to learn about their culture. Another quarter uses it to learn an Aboriginal language.

6815 We cannot forget the recent Calls to Action in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s final report, which spoke of the federal government’s responsibility to revitalize and preserve Aboriginal languages given the colonial legacy in Canada. The effect of colonization is not a relic of the past. Instead, these effects continue and are borne out each day in First Nations.

6816 It is important to recognize that while the internet has led to the creation of a digital economy, the internet is also a powerful tool of cultural survival for First Nations. It has the potential to provide a cost-effective means of connecting family and community, and transmitting culture. The impact of access to quality affordable broadband internet services cannot be underestimated.

6817 The role of the CRTC in promoting reliable broadband internet as part of its basic service objective must include setting minimum service standards and regulating rates to ensure affordability.

6818 Minimum standards should focus on bandwidth and be reviewed periodically and adjusted to reflect the service levels in competitive Canadian urban markets. A focus on bandwidth has the ability to recognize rapidly evolving technologies and shifting values attached to particular activities.

6819 Where minimum standards are concerned, a necessary starting point is in closing the infrastructure gap experienced in many First Nations so that any minimum standards set are actually meaningful.

6820 MKO supports in principle the Affordable Access Coalition’s proposal for a Broadband Deployment Funding Mechanism. For MKO, a necessary component of any BDFM is supporting opportunities for development and growth of First Nations and Aboriginal businesses. This can be done through the implementation of a Procurement Strategy for Aboriginal Businesses or a PSAB-like policy.

6821 MKO also believes it is important to recognize the incumbent internet service providers who were the first service providers in many underserved or unserved communities.

6822 Many MKO First Nations in northern Manitoba are being served by First Nation-controlled internet service providers where many larger telecommunications companies have feared to tread. First Nations should be able to determine whether their incumbent ISPs have been effective and whether they could be accounted for in any auction process related to a BDFM.

6823 An integral part of having meaningful minimum standards is the effective monitoring and enforcement of service standards. This includes transparent reporting to consumers and First Nations and a formal complaint process through the CRTC where a fund administrator cannot address ongoing or constant quality-of-service issues.

6824 With broadband deployment effectively prioritized and measures taken to ensure First Nations have the appropriate infrastructure to support any minimum service standards, MKO supports an affordability funding mechanism, like the AFM proposed by AAC.

6825 Any AFM should account for subscriber system realities of First Nation communities and be made available on the eligibility of households for whom services are provided where, as is common in MKO First Nations, a particular First Nation may have taken on the role of responsible subscriber to ensure internet services are available to the whole community.

6826 A focus on broadband deployment, monitoring and enforcement of service standards, and increasing the affordability of telecommunications services, including broadband internet, is important and necessary for the objectives of the Telecommunications Act to be met.

6827 In doing so, there is a potential to have a real impact in the daily lives of northern First Nations. They should not continue to be treated as second-class citizens when it comes to quality, reliable, and affordable access to telecommunications services, including broadband internet services.

6828 The internet is the new centre for MKO First Nations. Any regulatory action must consider the unique circumstances of MKO and other northern First Nations. The time to include broadband internet services in the basic service objective is now.

6829 Thank you for the opportunity to present to you today. Subject to any questions, that concludes our submissions on behalf of MKO.

6830 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much for your presentation.

6831 Vice-Chair Menzies will have some questions for you.

6832 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Thank you.

6833 You did a very good job on putting this proposal together; it’s quite thorough and multifaceted. I have a few questions to begin with about the BDFM, with the license to serve proposal.

6834 First of all, what do you think would be the appropriate criteria for designation as an underserved area?

6835 MS. FENSKE: If I could just have one moment, Commissioner Menzies?

6836 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Sure.

6837 MS. FENSKE: I think that hopefully you’ll find some assistance in paragraph 161 in our February 1 further intervention where we do discuss some of the eligibility requirements for First Nations in particular with respect to the BDFM.

6838 MKO’s position would be that the BDFM should be made available to all First Nations that will not meet the minimum standards of a basic service objective for broadband that would be established by the CRTC.

6839 So in hoping that the CRTC would set a standard and include broadband in a basic service objective, whatever communities are not currently meeting that objective would be considered to be underserved and that that would be the broad eligibility requirements in terms of access to any broadband deployment funding mechanism.

6840 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Okay. And would it be available to non-First Nations communities as well?

6841 MS. FENSKE: I would expect and certainly AAC’s proposal contemplates that. My reference to First Nations is simply because we’re here representing our client, who is a coalition of northern First Nation communities. And so that’s the perspective that we’re speaking from. But certainly we wouldn’t expect that it would necessarily be restricted to First Nation communities.

6842 Although I will say that in many instances while there are certainly underserved and unserved non-First Nation communities, the effects of being underserved or unserved on a First Nation who is already facing multiple disadvantages at other infrastructure social indicator levels, those effects are far more pronounced in many First Nation communities.

6843 And so if there was a limit in terms of the capacity for the BDFM to apply to underserved, we would expect and would suggest that prioritization be given to northern and First Nation communities or the remote and isolated First Nation communities where the importance of having access to the internet is all the more important given the fact that they don’t have the same access to services within the community itself.

6844 So you know, you don’t have a bricks-and-mortar financial institution or you may not have a hospital. You may not have a local RCMP detachment. Government services and branches may be located outside of the community itself. So recognizing that tie through the internet, is that much more important. And so we’d hope that in prioritizing that that would be taken into account.

6845 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Okay, thank you.

6846 What sort of guidance would you give us when it comes to areas where there are unresolved land claims, and just in terms of being able to designate what is and what isn’t a First Nations community? Do you understand?

6847 MS. FENSKE: No, I’m sorry; I’m not sure I’m understanding the connection.

6848 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: The difference between treaty areas and non-treaty areas where there may be outstanding land claims, unresolved?

6849 MS. FENSKE: Sorry, is that question linked to what I’ve suggested, that the priorities be given to northern and First Nation communities?

6850 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Yes, it is.

6851 MS. FENSKE: Okay.

6852 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: The answer can be, “We’ll get back to you.” You can undertake ---

6853 MS. FENSKE: Yeah, I think that on that particular question yeah, I would have to make an undertaking to inquire with our client as to if there would be any distinction drawn between treaty and non-treaty communities, the way that you’ve phrased that.

6854 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Sure.

6855 MS. FENSKE: If that’s acceptable to you.

6856 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: That’s very good. May 5th I believe is our date for those undertakings, okay?

6857 UNDERTAKING

6858 MS. FENSKE: Yes.

6859 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: The other question, and I may have missed it, but what length of license term do you generally envision for the successful licensees under the BDFM?

6860 MS. FENSKE: Sorry, I’m just consulting with a colleague.

6861 We would be supporting the submissions of AAC in that respect and their particular licensing terms around that.

6862 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Can you remind me what that was?

6863 MS. FENSKE: If I can be reminded of what that was I could certainly remind you.

6864 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Okay. Well, that’s fine. I just didn’t recall them having a specific one but I read your file most recently.

6865 MS. FENSKE: Yeah, I appreciate that. Thank you.

6866 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: While she’s looking that up I’ll get onto the next question, if that’s okay? And we can come back to that? Okay.

6867 MS. FENSKE: Yes.

6868 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: And the next question is, would these licensees be expected to provided competitor access via wholesale agreements or would they monopoly licensees?

6869 MS. FENSKE: I think that just in terms of some of the specifics around those proposals, what I can advise in terms of the AAC. So MKO was supporting in principle the position of the AAC with respect to both broadband deployment funding mechanisms and the AFM, which I know is not the subject of your question. To that and MKO retained an expert and technical advisor. So John Todd of Elenchus Research has been assisting MKO in its participation. We have had early and frequent engagement with the folks at AAC. Mr. Todd has maintained an ongoing dialogue with their expert, Mr. Sepulveda, from early on in the development of their proposal.

6870 So we have confidence in their proposal so the specifics that are relating to -- that are part and parcel of AAC's proposal, MKO accepts that and has confidence in that and supports that.

6871 To the extent that there are unique aspects to the experiences of Northern First Nations that the CRTC should take into account alongside AAC's proposal we hopefully can assist in understanding that.

6872 UNDERTAKING

6873 MS. FENSKE: But ultimately the BDFM is AAC's proposal. So if you think that we are looking for more specific comments from MKO in terms of competitor access versus monopoly licensing, I would ask that we be able to take an undertaking with respect to that particular question as well.

6874 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Sure, that’s fine with us.

6875 And would the retail rates be regulated by the CRTC?

6876 MS. FENSKE: So, yes, they would be under that proposal.

6877 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: So retail rates on First Nations would be regulated by CRTC, just to confirm?

6878 UNDERTAKING

6879 MS. FENSKE: My initial answer is yes, and I would like to confirm with my client on that matter.

6880 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Certainly. You are keeping a list, right?

6881 Just making sure we are keeping up too.

6882 And more curiously, do you see this as an opportunity primarily for joint ventures with First Nations communities or primarily dealing with First Nations providers on a First Nation to First Nation basis?

6883 MS. FENSKE: I think that the way we discussed the -- and that goes back to some of our submissions that directly relate to the principles around PSAB or debt procurement strategy and what that might mean in terms of impact for First Nations, I think that we kind of weighted that as being -- and the short answer is yes, both of those things could be an opportunity and so the main objective is ensuring that a community is -- that minimum standards are met in the First Nation. And so if that is being done by -- directly by a service provider that -- and if there is opportunities for there to be joint ventures, if that's of interest to the community and that that opportunity is presented, that we see the encouragement and promotion of First Nation businesses as an important opportunity.

6884 So wherever that is possible, there would be a preference towards promoting and ensuring that First Nation businesses flourish. That said the ultimate objective is that those minimum standards are met across the First Nations that MKO represents.

6885 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Okay. Just one more on BDFM is that I was trying to get a handle on it because you spoke about local decision makers being involved in the process and that and at the same time it's a CRTC licence.

6886 And we're not in Northern Manitoba so there is a bit of distance there between local decision makers and decision makers being made here, not that we wouldn't be sensitive to that.

6887 I was just a little unclear on how local decision makers would be engaged in this licensing process. Perhaps if you could fill that out for me a little that would be great.

6888 MS. FENSKE: Sure. So at a practical level in terms of the initial foray into the auction process, if you had a kind of RFP-type or request for proposal that there would be built into that that the -- whoever is bidding would have to be advising the CRTC what kind of relationship building has been done in terms of the First Nations that they are proposing to provide services to. And again, with a designated preference towards First Nations businesses or First Nations ventures then you would -- that would be a part of the criteria that you would be assessing bids on the basis of. Those would be some important principles to take into consideration.

6889 On a go-forward basis, we have also been advocating more involved monitoring and enforcement efforts and it would be through that monitoring process that you as a regulator would potentially be having a kind of ongoing communication with the communities that are being served in terms of the fund administrator reporting back or, pardon me, between service providers reporting to the fund administrator or the CRTC directly however it's setup, but that there would be that link in terms of communicating the responsiveness of the service provider and that there would be more -- because there would be a more robust monitoring and enforcement aspect of things that that would be one avenue for linking the communities with the regulator directly and having those community voices heard.

6890 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Okay, thank you.

6891 You talked about -- expressed concern about ensuring a good transition to fully digital services and how if internet service is part of the basic service definition, it can provide POTS through VoIP. So do you believe subsidy regimes should exist for both POTS, landline POTS and internet access and, if so, how is it that justified given that the latter can provide the former in terms of telephony?

6892 MS. FENSKE: I think that -- certainly, and so with respect to that, I think that our answer to that question would be fairly consistent with what I believe you heard from AAC yesterday in terms of recognizing that we are in a period of transition.

6893 So it may not be that the continued regime around POTS continues into the indefinite future but, certainly, for the time being POTS still remains a very important aspect for certain consumers in First Nations and our ultimate -- our client's ultimate position is that no consumer in their communities should be left behind, no MKO citizen should be left behind.

6894 So in recognizing that that is a -- it could be termed and this market is certainly a smaller number of people as access to internet and what the internet encompasses increases but that there should be at the very least a kind of transition away from it, if that is the direction that the CRTC would have, was it shouldn't be done in the immediate sense because POTS still remains an important aspect for telecommunications services for some MKO citizens.

6895 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Okay, thank you.

6896 The recent federal budget designated, I think, $255 million for broadband and infrastructure for indigenous people in remote areas. Do you see that having an impact on this discussion in the short term?

6897 MS. FENSKE: I think in terms of the short term, I think that it offers an opportunity that there is not a one-size-fits-all or one party which there was a right or responsibility lies that there is going to be a combination of different forces be it market forces cooperating and working collaboratively with government investment. That is an important promise that has a lot of potential but it remains to be seen whether that -- how that money flows out and to which areas and which communities and the impact that it actually has.

6898 So given that -- well, what our ultimate position is, is that the time for including a basic -- including broadband in a basic service objective is now that certainly there may be some avenues for government investment but that there needs to be minimum standards and minimum investments made that are kind of -- that are guaranteed and that people can see relief in the immediate.

6899 So it's not clear to me at this time what kind of timeline and how that those investments will be deployed, and so while we are hopeful that it will have a meaningful impact that I think is to hang one's hat on promises, you know commitments that have been made that haven’t yet been deployed or that aren't -- that we can't reflect on could put us even further behind and you could see us in another hearing five years from now still encountering some of the same issues.

6900 It's really important that we capitalize on opportunities now to make a real difference for MKO citizens and other First Nation citizens' lives.

6901 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Okay. I am also curious to know how this project intersects or potentially overlaps with the work of Broadband Communications North? Because it seems to me that a person could look at their work and say that under the current structure they have achieved some success in terms of providing connectivity to remote First Nations communities and perhaps things should stay the way they are to perhaps spur it a little bit to help them continue their work in that regard, and that this might be interfering with that or interrupting that in some way. Could you address that or is it complementary?

6902 MS. FESKE: I think it’s complementary and our submissions specifically contemplate, and where we have something kind of to add to the AAC proposal, is specific to the issue of incumbent service providers. And we’ve specifically referenced BCN as that example. So just in terms of a paragraph reference for you, paragraph 132 is where that starts in terms of our further intervention.

6903 And what we’re saying is that there’s a really important need to recognize the important contributions that those first service providers and the incumbents like BCN have made. Again, going back to my statements in my presentation about where other companies may have feared to tread, they’ve made really important forays into providing services.

6904 That said, the reality is that for many MKO First Nations, they are still not reaching what we would expect to see as a minimum service standard, notwithstanding the important contributions that providers like the BCN have made.

6905 And so in any sort of deployment fund, that goes back to your earlier question about community voices and having communities heard. What we envision as happening is where you have an incumbent service provider, it really should be up to the community as to whether what they’ve been doing has been adequate.

6906 And so where you have a service provider who’s made inroads into a community, who’s developed good relationships, who’s doing the best that they can in the circumstances, in the market and regulatory regime that we have now, it may be that a community wants to see that provider in their First Nation continue to flourish with the support that they would be able to access under potentially the BDFM model.

6907 And so the idea would be that if the incumbent had that relationship with the community where the community is happy with their services and happy with the potential opportunities to improve on those services based on the incentives and the support that could be available through a mechanism like a BDFM, that those would be very intertwined and complementary to each other.

6908 And I’m not specifying any particular service provider here, but if a service provider has not been adequately meeting the needs of the community or responsive, then again that’s up to the community to say, “You know, you haven’t been effective and we think that there should be an open bidding process here.”

6909 And so again, putting a lot of the direction and, you know, recognizing that communities themselves, that the First Nations themselves have a voice in this, and that they have important messages that need to be heard by the regulator and via service providers directly.

6910 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Okay, thanks.

6911 In paragraph 158 of your submission you discussed situations where some First Nations may want a higher minimum level of service than that mandated by us.

6912 So are you open to a model such as proposed by some intervenors in this, call it skinny broadband if you want, where a basic level is mandated by us and that subsidy only apply to that, but that access to higher levels of service also be there for those who wish to purchase them? And that this could be managed not necessarily by a broader fund, but on a First-Nation-by-First-Nation basis or financed that way?

6913 MS. FENSKE: Yes, that’s consistent with our submissions on that point, certainly.

6914 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Okay. Thank you.

6915 The AAC proposal supports 10 down and 3 up as a basic standard. But there’s some evidence -- I’ll point to one here in Rogers’ second intervention at paragraph 33 where they argue and others do that 5 and 1 are sufficient to meet basic needs including Skype. Is that not the case?

6916 MS. FENSKE: In terms of commenting specifically on the 5 and 1, I’ll note simply that for many MKO First Nations the service levels are not even meeting that threshold. So that’s the starting point for the experience of First Nation communities of my plan.

6917 When it comes to specific targets, whether it’s 10/3 or 5 and 1, MKO has very deliberately stayed away from advocating a particular target speed on what’s the right bandwidth for Canadians. What MKO is saying is that First Nations and in particular the northern First Nations like the ones MKO serves, should have access to the same speeds as the rest of Canada.

6918 And so the minimum standards that are workable for someone in an urban setting are potentially less sufficient for many MKO First Nations because those in an urban centre are not as completely dependent on the internet for their basic needs as I kind of elaborated in some of my earlier comments.

6919 So with that, we think that whatever the minimum standard is -- or the standard set should be a floor not a ceiling, and then whatever that minimum standard is should be applicable across Canada so that First Nations are not further disadvantaged and remote and northern communities are not further disadvantaged from their urban counterparts in terms of their connectivity to the internet.

6920 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Right. Do you think those communities would be comfortable with a situation where they had the same minimum standards, access to the same minimums as everybody else, and understand that in areas where market forces are significantly more vibrant that while they would have equal access to the same floor, that the ceiling would likely be different? Do you think communities would be accepting of that reality?

6921 MS. FENSKE: I kind of want to address this in two ways.

6922 The first is just to say that in setting any standards that they should be something that is not stagnant and that there’s a process in place for it to evolve, and so that as technology continues to improve, that the standards are flexible enough or that the principles around the standards are flexible enough that the minimum standard can move with the increase in technological advancements.

6923 When it comes to this idea of -- and these are not your words; I respect that. But the idea that for remote and isolated communities maybe it just can’t be done in terms of that higher level. What I might to say to that is I don’t expect that we would accept that premise, especially when we’re considering that we’re talking about the telecommunications industry and services. If there is any industry where the sky is the limit and where you can count of innovative and creative advancements, it’s with that technology sector.

6924 And so we’re advocating for a minimum standard that needs to be met for all Canadians.

6925 But we think that it’s within the CRTC’s jurisdiction to also set aspirational goals, to set a goal, issue that challenge, and properly incentivize it. And there’s no guarantees that that will translate back to those remote and isolated communities, but that should be the starting point in terms of trying to maximize the opportunities for success for everyone involved.

6926 And so in representing, you know, northern First Nation communities and that married with the technology sector, I just don’t know that we can accept that there’s not a solution out there when we see how far we’ve come from even, you know, 30 years ago when the internet was, you know, an idea in someone’s imagination to now. And that just again goes back to our earlier point about the need for these goals and targets to be responsive to the technological advancements that are available.

6927 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: That was elegantly answered. Thank you.

6928 The last area was you talked quite a bit about service standards. And I’m at least a little unclear on the nature of whether the licensees are monopolistic or not.

6929 And it’s one of the issues that comes before us, is that one of the better ways to enforce service standards is to have a competitive framework, so there is an option if somebody is not maintaining high service, quality of service to go to somebody who will in terms of that.

6930 So what do you think is more important, the provision of -- or sort of how would you have us enforce those basic service standards or would you not prefer a model where there was competitor access so that competition would serve that need.

6931 MS. FENSKE: I think that for the -- for MKO First Nations, the overall objective is to have those standards met.

6932 You know, it’s one of the reasons why our submissions have been technology neutral, why we haven’t suggested a -- or particularized the bandwidth that we would suggest. It’s that however it happens, that it -- that First Nations not be left behind, and no consumer being left behind, and in particular First Nations not be left behind.

6933 And so I think you can look to our submissions on monitoring and enforcement where the -- there would be an administrator would have the role of ensuring that performance criteria was set for a service provider contract, that that’s respected, and if that service provider is not able to meet the needs of the community or not able to meet the standard set, that, yeah, that a competitive bidding process should be in place.

6934 We also recognize the reality of MKO First Nations communities and their experience to date has been that one of the reasons why they are so often left behind is that there’s just not an appetite from the market to serve these communities.

6935 And so that, again, just goes back to ensuring that there’s proper incentives and funding mechanisms in place to attract service providers to the underserved and unserved First Nations communities.

6936 COMMISSIONER MENZIES: Okay. Thank you. Those are my questions. I’ll turn you back over to the chairman and my colleagues and I expect ultimately our legal staff. Thank you.

6937 MS. FENSKE: Thank you.

6938 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay, I’ve polled colleagues and legal staff and I don’t know if it’s luckily or unluckily for you, there are no other questions. So I appreciate you having participated.

6939 There were a number of undertakings upfront. As you know, we’ll be publishing today’s transcripts around 11 o’clock local time here in the nation’s capital. So you can look at the beginning of the -- of today’s volume and all the undertakings will be listed there. So, yeah. As a reminder, in case you ---

6940 MS. FENSKE: Thank you very much.

6941 THE CHAIRPERSON: --- may have missed some in there. So thank you very much.

6942 I believe that’s all our interventions for today, Madam Secretary. So we’ll be adjourned until 9 o’clock Monday morning.

6943 Donc bon weekend à tous et on est en ajournement jusqu’à 9 heures lundi matin. Merci.

--- Upon adjourning at 4:05 p.m.

REPORTERS

Sean Prouse

Mathieu Bastien-Marcil

Lucie Morin-Brock

Renée Vaive

Lyne Charbonneau

Karen Pare

Ian Schryber

Krista Campbell

Kathy Poirier

Karen Noganosh

Mathieu Philippe

Date modified:

2016-04-15