Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) introduced Bill S-260, An Act respecting National Diffuse Midline Glioma Awareness Day.

(Bill read first time.)

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): I move the adjournment of the debate.

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Honourable senators, I rise today to speak to Bill S-242, an act to amend the Radiocommunication Act. I would like to thank Senator Patterson of Nunavut for introducing this bill and working on it so diligently.

I believe the bill makes a very important contribution towards stimulating government action. Colleagues, what we are facing in this country are serious connectivity challenges for rural and remote parts of Canada. There are senators in this chamber who are very familiar with many of those challenges. Senator Manning, for instance, who is a member of the Senate Communications and Transport Committee that reviewed this bill, spoke to many of the challenges he himself has faced in his home province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I know that other senators are also very familiar with the significant challenges faced by Canadians in the provinces, territories or regions they represent. That is, of course, particularly true for Senator Patterson.

When Senator Patterson spoke on his bill at the Senate Communications Committee, he referenced a key motivation that led him to introduce this bill. Specifically, he said:

Many of you will remember various questions or interventions that I have made over the years about improving connectivity for rural and remote regions within this vast country of ours. My region is probably a poster boy in remoteness and inaccessibility. This bill is another attempt to help all Canadians have access to the same level of service that you and I enjoy while here in Ottawa.

Honourable senators, I think those of us who live in urban centres, where we take so many of our conveniences for granted, need to reflect on the challenges faced by many in rural and remote parts of our country who do not enjoy such conveniences. I believe it is actually a misnomer to refer to connectivity simply as a convenience. In the connected society in which we live, it has become essential to ensure that all Canadians can have at least similar opportunities in our digital world.

In the remarks I originally made on this bill at second reading, I referenced an article in Policy magazine by Helaina Gaspard, Alanna Sharman and Tianna Tischbein of the University of Ottawa. That article, entitled “Governing Connectivity: How is Spectrum Policy Impacting the Lives of Canadians?,” noted how important access to spectrum is for anyone in our digital economy. The authors stated:

Spectrum has a direct or indirect role in most areas of industrial development and economic activity. From connectivity to medicine to transport and shipping, spectrum policy — the policies shaping how spectrum is allocated to different users and uses — has implications for economies and people.

That is where I believe this bill has been so important. It has brought badly needed attention to the issue of connectivity for Canadians living in remote and rural areas. In that regard, Senator Patterson has done these Canadians a very significant service.

The Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications reviewed the bill and heard from many witnesses. Some witnesses expressed concerns that the bill, as drafted, might not facilitate rural connectivity in the way that it was intended. Jonathan Black, Executive Director of the Canadian Association of Wireless Internet Service Providers, told the committee that his association strongly supports a use-it-or-lose-it framework and the fundamental premise of Bill S-242. But he worried that “a one-size-fits-all approach to deployment requirements” might not work as intended in rural P.E.I. or coastal B.C. He also worried that the civil liability imposed by the bill might discourage investment.

Similar concerns were expressed by Robert Ghiz, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association, who also said of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada:

. . . the department requires a flexible framework that allows it to tailor its processes in spectrum licensing conditions to suit the unique characteristics of the spectrum band being licensed and its proposed use.

Mr. Ghiz worried that:

A one-size-fits-all requirement will limit the department’s ability to do so and risk undermining the department’s and the industry’s shared goal of improving network quality and coverage.

These concerns notwithstanding, we remain confronted with a serious problem. As I stated when I spoke to the bill at second reading, only 30% of rural communities have access to high‑speed internet, and only 24% of Indigenous communities have similar access.

The COVID-19 pandemic pointed out the urgency of accelerating progress towards digital equity for rural Indigenous communities. The perpetuation of digital inequity will only increase the existing socio-economic gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people, not only for business opportunities and employment but in education and physical and mental health as well. Indigenous communities must be fully equipped to access broadband, to contribute, thrive and succeed in today’s digital society. So, we need to strongly encourage active measures to address these serious gaps for our most vulnerable communities.

Eva Clayton, President of Nisga’a Lisims Government, spoke for many Canadians in these vulnerable communities when she stated:

Having a legal recourse and some assurance that the service providers will be held to account and will be held accountable to remote communities through this bill will not only help communities access important and critical services but will also help alleviate some of the financial burdens in order to stay connected because of a lack of oversight.

Similarly, Professor Jeff Church of the University of Calgary expressed his delight with Bill S-242. He referenced analysis by which TELUS found that “only 20% of some set-aside spectrum in rural area has been deployed,” and that spectrum set-asides range from 40% to 60% of the total in some auctions. He argued that this pointed to a considerable misallocation of spectrum. The misallocation, he said:

. . . becomes notable when spectrum has been assigned but there is either poor or no service in rural and remote areas.

When I consider what the committee did, I am pleased at the way it sought to respond to what these witnesses told the committee and to instead bridge some of these gaps. An amendment introduced by Senator Harder and supported by Senator Patterson provides for greater flexibility through the provision of greater flexibility to the minister and potentially working with smaller service providers to assist in providing greater coverage of rural areas.

Senator Patterson also engaged in significant consultations with stakeholders to further improve his own bill through amendments which further encourage licence holders to deploy spectrum as broadly and inclusively as possible, in particular, to better serve rural and remote areas.

When he spoke at committee, Professor Gregory Taylor of the University of Calgary made the specific point that this bill has brought real issues into the policy discussions that have been insufficiently addressed up to this point. There is clearly more work still to be done.

The committee itself acknowledged that in its own observations on the bill in relation to the need for additional government policies and incentives to encourage proponents to serve rural and remote regions, particularly Indigenous communities, who are among the most unconnected communities in the country. Since these recommendations were beyond the scope of this bill, it will be incumbent upon government to take concerted action.

Honourable senators, this gap in rural and remote connectivity has been with us for too long. In 2021, the Conservative Party’s election platform stated:

As technology continues to advance, the infrastructure of the future – broadband and 5G – will be increasingly critical to job creation.

The platform proposed to “build digital infrastructure to connect all of Canada to High-Speed Internet by 2025,” to accelerate the building of rural broadband and to implement a new and faster approach to the spectrum auction process and integrate use-it-or-lose-it provisions to ensure that spectrum, particularly in rural areas, is actually developed.

The current government has also made commitment to the use-it-or-lose-it approach, and that commitment is incorporated in Minister Champagne’s mandate letter specifically. It directs the minister to:

Accelerate broadband delivery by implementing a “use it or lose it” approach to require those that have purchased rights to build broadband to meet broadband access milestones or risk losing their spectrum rights.

So, we have widespread agreement that this should be done. But we have simply not been moving fast enough. We should be under no doubt that due to the current government’s delays, Canada now has considerable catching up to do. As I noted at second reading, Canada ranks below the OECD average when it comes to connectivity. In contrast to Canada, 5G is already being rolled out in countries such as Korea and Norway. Korea is already working ahead to 6G considerations, with government and universities engaged in planning and the study of applications for end users.

Canada’s sluggish approach is having significant implications for Canada’s global competitiveness. If we fail to act, not only will our economic competitiveness be impacted, but the government’s own ability to ensure effective services will be undermined. In areas such as health care delivery, for example, this has very serious implications.

I believe that Senator Patterson’s bill makes an important contribution to ensuring that we finally address this issue. Honourable senators, I ask you to support sending the bill to the House of Commons so that it can be adopted and to prod the government into broader policy actions that will tackle this very important issue. Thank you.