WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 2011
The CRTC
Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
Mission Statement:
To ensure that Canadian communications contribute fairly and equitably to Canada's economic, social and cultural prosperity through regulation, supervision and public dialogue.
Vision Statement:
World-class quality communications, with a distinct Canadian presence, in the public interest.
(oh, and Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny are REAL!!)
Last month I got a call from my isp, advising me that as of March 1st, my unlimited internet account will be restricted to a maximum 25GB of bandwidth (or about one
steam game - with no bandwidth left over to play it). Any additional bandwidth I might use will be billed at the cost of $2.95 per GB up to 60GB, and then $1.75 per GB for any use above that. No grandfathering, exceptions or higher bandwidth plans to chose from.
As the message continued I was advised that so far (at January 10th), I had already used 70GB for the month. Simple calculations conclude that under the new plan, my $48/month (plus tax) unlimited internet service would now cost me $241 if my current usage levels were to continue.
Ouch!
I'd like to add here, that Bell Canada charges my isp $4.25 for each 40GB block of bandwitdh. That's just fractionally over 10¢/GB wholesale... but it's gonna cost consumers $1.50 or more retail???
Here Bell, why not take my left testicle too! Go ahead, take it in the name of cultural prosperity!
This is not a policy that my isp chose to implement - they rely on things like unlimited access plans and free premium usenet to compete with the big guys. No, they have been legislated to do so by that guardian of the public interest, the CRTC.
You see, it seems that with the advent of
Netflix and various other streaming services coming online in Canada, the big players (Bell, Rogers, Shaw, Telus) are at an unfair disadvantage. These billion-dollar companies can't afford to offer unlimited access to their subscribers (bandwidth can cost THEM as much as 3¢ a GB!), so why should smaller isps be allowed to do so. They can however, afford to offer on-demand TV and Movies plans - and charge absolutely no
bandwidth fees (the service itself costs approx 24.95
a month).
The CRTC agreed, and instructed all Canadian isp's to introduce Usage Based Billing (or UBB.)
Such a massive overhaul to the way we pay for the internet will result in many Canadians suddenly paying more for the internet than they do for their vehicle leases!! For a government regulatory body to be on-side with such changes, it must indicate that we have been getting quite a break until now. We must have the best value service in the world!
Let's have a look...
Wow! I'm moving to South Korea! Hell, even the U.S. gets double our transfer speeds. This is upload speed though, and without cable or fibre-optics, slow uploads have always been a reality. I bet the CRTC has seen to it that Canada has the fastest download speeds though...
Geez, looks like everyone on the planet has faster internet than us! Maybe this is because the CRTC has restricted fees so much in the past, that our internet is cheaper than everyone elses? Ya, that must be it! That's why they have to increase my internet fees nearly tenfold! Because I was already paying so little! Here, I'll prove it...
Hunh? We have the slowest internet speed AND the highest per GB fees?? (note Rogers' unlimited plan will be eliminated under the new regulations, so their maximum fees will become usage based - resulting in charges 90¢/GB compared with 02¢ to 15¢ throughout the rest of the world. If you're with Bell or Techavvy you already pay these fees)
So why did the CRTC approve Usage Based Billing which is going to cost us 10 to 100 times more than other countries
- for the slowest internet in the world?????
After all, bandwidth is not something that "runs out" like a commodity, if you need more bandwidth you just expand your infrastructure to accommodate additional usage. Certainly if you're charging the highest fees on the planet, you must be putting some of that money back into your service, to provide for increased bandwidth requirements and usage growth? To hear Bell and Rogers tell it, there's a limited amount of bandwidth to be had, which is simply not the case (unless
they chose to make it so).
So, if bandwidth shortages are impossible, why did the CRTC agree to allow caps and charges for additonal use? How does limiting usage of a technology meet their mandate?
My brother and his lovely wife exceeded the 20GB cap already in place on their account (Bell) for the first time, the month they joined Netflix.
Netflix costs $8.00 a month.
With UBB, Netflix's $8.00 will likely end up being far more expensive for most users than the $24.95 for similar services from Rogers or Bell. Of course the CRTC wouldn't approve fees which would give an unfair advantage to some players over others, would they???
Rogers doesn't have a true unlimited plan, but they do have heavy-user plans (up to 180GB month bandwidth included at about $100/month). Now, as I've already said, my monthly isp fees are soon going to be over $200 a month with my current usage.
- OR -
I can switch to Rogers and pay a flat rate of $100. Hmmm... Whaddaya think most users are going to do?
The mass customer exodus from smaller isp's is going to put every one of them out of business.
Now wait a minute, the CRTC's Mission Statement states, "To ensure that Canadian communications contribute fairly and equitably..." how does sending small isp's into bankruptcy, and crippling companies like Netflix.ca somehow ensure fairness or equity.
(Or did they mean "
fairly and equitably" in the same way Fox News means "Fair and Balanced")
Now, I dunno about you, but to me it sounds more like someone (or everyone) at the CRTC has been having liberal amounts of palm-grease applied by the major telecom players, and it's the Canadian consumer who is being jerked-off!
If the CRTC and it's members are not under an illicit payroll and kick-back scheme with the corporations whom they are supposed to regulate and supervise, then they are simply incompetent, as indicated by their remaining blissfully oblivious to the blatant manipulation of their commission by corporate interests...
Either the CRTC is corrupt and on-the-take, or we have all been transported to bizarro world!
and it gets worse...
Big Brother CRTC is adding Newspeak to the following regulations:
Radio Regulations, 1986, Television Broadcasting Regulations, 1987, Pay Television Regulations, 1990, Specialty Services Regulations, 1990, and the Broadcasting Information Regulations, 1993.
The amended Regulations will be effective 1 September 2011.
So what's been changed? Well there's tweaks to what defines "obscene" language, and amendments to complaint response and dispute resolution. Oh, and there's this...
Paragraph 5(1) of the Regulations, which, under subsection (d) currently prohibits the broadcast of:
"any false or misleading news."
is being changed to:
"any news that the licensee knows is false or misleading
and that endangers or is likely to endanger the lives,
health or safety of the public."
So there you have it folks. As of September 1st of this year, if the CBC or CTV or anyone broadcasting in Canada chooses to falsify election results, or bear false witness to the actions of a world leader, or exaggerate a crisis, or lie to you for any reason, they can do so at their leisure, and present it as REAL news, as long as the lie doesn't (likely) threaten your life.
C'mon! I can get on board for the "...that the licensee knows..." - Adding that to the article could probably save a small broadcaster from incensed viewers. Good Idea! But saying that it's OK to lie (in the guise of news) as long as you don't (likely) hurt or kill someone, THAT I take exception with!
Our media is standing on an Orwellian precipice, and soon broadcast news is to be redefined.
Even the most bold-faced falsehood will be able to be read by Peter Mansbridge or Lloyd Robertson and presented as truth.
And even though the CRTC's public consultations on the matter expire in 1 hour (midnight February 9th - sorry just found out while writing this), the only CRTC action being talked about by any broadcast media is the ruling on usage based internet billing. There has been virtual silence on
this ruling which, when it comes into effect in September, will make dangerous and fundamental changes to how much our evening news anchors can lie to us. How in the hell is this "
in the public interest"
1984 commences in Canada on September 1st, 2011
Now, if there is one absolute truism in Canada, it is that you can make the government to do whatever you want them to do, simply by saying that your cause is an election issue.
This is especially true if the Government is serving in a minority Parliament, and they have an unbridled lust for power like Conservative Party of Canada. Let's face it, I could get any Conservative MP to blow me in a (crowded) public washroom if he/she thought it would get their party a few extra seats in the next election.
Well, the fine folks over at
OpenMedia.ca started a
petition to fight UBB, and suggested that the CRTC internet bandwidth ruling be made an election issue
(ALL CRTC RULINGS SHOULD BE! -ed).
Within hours of the "election" word having been used in relation to the petition, Industry Minister Tony Clement went public and said that if the CRTC did not "go back to the drawing board" and reverse their decision, then the Government of Canada would do it for them.
Geez, Tony those are such strong fighting words, they're almost a blow job for the whole Nation! Well Done! If it wasn't such a transparent piece of electioneering, I might think that our Government was choosing people over corporate rights!
"There is always a healthy balance and tension between a regulator that
is appointed and a government that is elected, and I'm sure 90 times out
of a 100 the regulator may get it right. But there are times when we,
acting on behalf of the government, have to weigh in. That's our
responsibility and that's our role."
OK Tony, then what took you so long? The ruling is old news....why wait until the 11th hour to say something? And didn't your boss hand-pick the current CRTC Chairman, Konrad von Finckenstein?
Well, to skip ahead, the CRTC (who swears the move has nothing to do with Clement's press release) has decided to review the ruling. They have also opened
public consultations (go ahead click the link! It's a chance to actually participate in democracy).
And unlike the "fake news" rulings outlined earlier, this consultation process is open until March 11.
Look, I am adept at ranting...and maybe you 're not, but it's not about how long each participant can ramble-on, it's the quality and quantity of the responses which will make a difference. So please, get involved...even if you just send them a copy of your internet bill!
The U.S. has Wall Street and the Federal Reserve screwing the taxpayers to maintain disproportionate and obscene wealth, Canada has the Telecommunications Industry and the CRTC*.
We can fall to our knees and pay-out like our neighbours to the south did, or we can finally say "fuck-you" and hobble Rogers and Bell down to an easily digestible size. We need to move en-masse to smaller internet service providers (available in both cable & DSL!), drop all the "extras" off of our land-lines (my monthly phone bill is just over $20), refuse to sign contracts for cellphone use (pay up-front for your phones you idiots - it's a fraction of the price!), and replace our cable subscriptions with $19 digital antennas (I get about 30 stations - each one of them clearer than through cable - all with 5.1 digital surround to boot!!). These dinosaurs of the telecom industry have simply become too big to allow NOT to fail!
And unless you think Canada somehow deserves the slowest and most expensive internet in the world
───────────────────────────────────────────
*(Canada has become the world leader in derivatives trading and training. You may remember that derivatives were the key Davids that slew the financial Goliaths in the recent global economic meltdown. Why are they still legal? Because they're wildly profitable and when they fail, the wealthy are not the victims. Make no mistake though they will eventually destroy the economy - and regardless of our arrogant air of economic superiority, our natural resources are not going to protect us forever...(we don't own any of them anymore anyway). Kids who play with fire will eventually get burned, and derivatives trading IS going to come back and kick us where the sun don't shine - the Rothchilds, Morgans, Vanderbilt and Rockefellers should walk away unscathed though - that should make you feel better. I'd suggest that everybody brush up on their Cantonese and Mandarin - we'll all be speaking Chinese soon!)
───────────────────────────────────────────
