SoVote

Mr. Ryan Williams (Bay of Quinte, CPC)

Nov/2/23 2:17:18 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, winter is here, and with rising costs, there is not one family that is not being left out in the cold. After eight years of the Liberal government, Canadians are struggling to heat their homes as the carbon tax is about to quadruple, costing Canadians more money they do not have. The Prime Minister knows this because he just paused the carbon tax for Atlantic Canadians, proving that he is just not worth the cost. What about the rest of Canada? What about Prince Edward County, Quinte West and Belleville? What about my wife's old riding of Thunder Bay? What about the NDP leader's Vancouver riding of Burnaby South? Do they not deserve to be treated as equal citizens? Is a Canadian not a Canadian? Our leader has introduced a motion to take off the carbon tax on all home heating in Canada this winter so Canadians can keep the heat on. On Monday, there might be the most important vote the NDP leader has ever had. Will he vote with common-sense Conservatives to keep the tax off so that Canadians can keep the heat on, or will he continue to sing along with the tone-deaf Prime Minister?

204 words

Context: House Hansard - 245 - Nov/2/23

Mr. Ryan Williams (Bay of Quinte, CPC)

Nov/2/23 6:39:56 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill S-242

Mr. Speaker, I want to again thank Senator Patterson for bringing this bill forward. I think he did the work he needed to do in the Senate. It has been very enjoyable to debate this bill and hear the responses from all members of Parliament. Canadians understand that they pay some of the highest cell phone bills in the world, but some are surprised that they pay the highest cell phone rates and some of the highest Internet rates in the world. Rogers, Telus and Bell are numbers one, two and three of the priciest telecommunications carriers in 48 countries out of the whole planet. Canadians already know that they pay this. However, the bill coming out of the Senate was to do one thing and one thing only: it was to tackle spectrum speculation, such as companies buying spectrum at auctions and then making money on that. The two examples we used were, first, Rogers, which had bought, in 2013, a bunch of spectrum, and only five years later it made a $189.5-million profit. It held that spectrum, and when the spectrum became valuable, it sold it. The second was Quebecor and Videotron. In 2008, it bought $96.4-million worth of spectrum and sold it for an $87.8-million profit just nine years later. This bill was only meant to look at spectrum speculation and to ensure that we tackle that. The current spectrum rules say that a company who buys and keeps spectrum can hold it for 20 years and has to serve a population model only after 20 years. The new rules under this bill maintain that, after three years, a company would have to hit a 50% geographical area, meaning that it cannot just look at population. A lot of these providers are looking only at the city of Toronto and not hitting the northern portions of it, or to the riding of the member for Milton, who spoke earlier. They are looking at the denser populations but not outside of those. What is most important about this bill, which normally I am against, is that it would give the minister a new power to decide what is best for a community, which means that the minister could decide if the auction was bought and was only speculative. The minister could then change that auction and ensure that it went to someone else. However, if a provider was attempting to develop an area that it was purposed for, then the minister could extend that auction and make sure that the area gets through by that auction. That is what this bill is all about: giving the minister more power to stop spectrum speculation. What is the point of this? Well, some members have talked about that 60% of rural Canada, where seven million Canadians live, that is not being serviced by high-speech Internet, and when they are, they are served by American companies, such as Starlink and Xplore, which are both American owned and controlled. However, when we look at Canadian companies serving Canadian markets, especially in the north and rural Canada, this bill was to ensure that we have companies that do that. Members talked about this does not quite do what they do, which is spectrum auction reform, meaning that we are going to look at the $9 billion that Canada makes that goes into general revenues and ensure that perhaps some of that needs to go back to rural Canada to connect the north and connect rural municipalities. We have 3,500 municipalities in Canada and only 94 of them are urban, which means that over 3,400 municipalities in Canada are rural. It would be best for all of us as MPs to look at rural strategies to look at this. Most importantly, let us get rid of this spectrum speculation. This whole premise is an anomaly and it was a flaw in the original bill of spectrum auctions, which allowed companies to make money simply because they bought an asset that is publicly owned, a public resource. Spectrum is for all Canadians. When we look at this bill, and I think it is a good one coming from the Senate, it would ensure that we tackle that flaw in this bill and ensure that we then look at the future. In the future, yes, we need more competition in Internet. We need more competition for cell phones. We do not just need a fourth carrier, we need 40 carriers to ensure that we look after Canadians' Internet needs and that all Canadians are connected to the Internet. We need it for health, for safety, and for employment, and we certainly need it for the prosperity of this great nation. I am thankful for this opportunity. This is a great bill, and I hope everyone can support it.

811 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 245 - Nov/2/23

Mr. Ryan Williams

Nov/2/23 6:45:14 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we request a recorded division.

7 words