February 17, 2011
Kamloopsians will sense a certain
déjà vu over the debate on internet metering. When asked in a referendum whether
they wanted to pay a flat rate for water or pay according to usage, most
rejected metering. Canadians feel the same way about internet metering. In an
Angus Reid poll, 75 per cent of Canadians wanted unlimited access to the
internet despite the fact that only a small fraction are heavy users. It's the
equivalent of paying for someone else's excessive use of water.
This amounts to a subsidy for a small number of high volume users by the
majority, claim some internet users. Why should they pay for expensive
infrastructure that benefits the data hogs? And if the size of the data pipeline
is limited, high volume users are slowing everyone's rate of flow to a trickle.
Other users counter that metering is a cash-grab. Not only are the extra fees
excessive but there is no way of knowing how much data you are using; the
equivalent of driving a car without a fuel gage, running out of gas and paying a
premium to go further. It's disingenuous for cable companies to levy a surcharge
on a limit you don't know you've exceeded until it's too late.
Remarkably, the internet is only recently indispensible. What was unknown two
decades ago has suddenly become essential. Human rights advocates argue that
access to the internet is required to close the gaping digital divide that
separates the rich and poor. Finland has made basic internet access a guaranteed
right of citizens and others will likely follow.
Unlike water, however, data is not distributed over publically-owned systems.
Telephone and cable companies are not in the business of dispensing human
rights. Cable companies complain that they have to build expensive
infrastructure to carry large volumes of data. They are less candid about their
desire to suppress the competition such as on-line movie distributors like
Netlflix which compete with their own movie channels, and the small cable
companies that they sell wholesale access to that don't meter use. Why allow
unlimited access to competitors over their own utility, they argue.
|
Enter the CRCT, Canada's broadcast regulator, who ruled in favour of
metering. CRTC chairman Konrad von Finckenstein claims that metering fees go
towards building better infrastructure and everyone should chip in. And he
also points out that cable companies are not exactly metering the internet.
Consumer can buy plans according to data use without paying extra fees. For
example, Shaw cable's high-speed plan allows up to 60 gigabytes with no
extra fees which seems sufficient considering that the average Canadian uses
one-third of that limit. In the face of the recent storm of protest, Shaw
has suspended extra billing.
With an election blowing in the wind, politicians are sensitive to the
public mood. Jack Layton, leader of the federal NDP, signed a petition
conducted by the lobby group OpenMedia.ca and told a crowd of supporters:
"Here we have a decision which is really going to limit people's access to
what's available in a very unfair way."
Stephen Harper's Conservatives are using public outrage as revenge against
one of their favourite targets and he senses support on this one. Harper is
still angry at the CRCT for scuttled his plans to bring "Fox News North" to
Canada and it's payback time. Harper's Industry Minister warns: "Regardless
of the outcome of the CRTC review, under a Conservative government this
ruling will not be implemented."
He may have to eat those bold words in light of a recent Supreme Court of
Canada that ruled that Harper doesn't have the legal right to override the
CRTC. The case involves the sale of public airwaves to cell phone companies.
The CRTC said that one bidder, Egyptian-based Orascom, was not Canadian and
therefore prohibited from buying frequencies according to the
Telecommunications Act which bans foreign ownership. Harper overruled the
CRTC on that one too, and now faces contempt of court.
Even cities are weighing in. Victoria passed a motion against usage billing
because it interferes with citizen's "ability to become educated,
communicate with others, and hampers the free and full exchange of
information." In the passion of the moment, I wouldn't be surprised if
governments added "the right of free internet access" as founding
constitutional principle.
With water meters on the way, don't look to Kamloops City Council for any
such grandiose resolutions.
David Charbonneau is the owner of Trio Technical.
He can be reached at
dcharbonneau13@shaw.ca
|