When we were asked by the SaveOurNet.ca Coalition to discuss our position on net neutrality and the future of the internet in general we jumped at the opportunity to be able to tell Canadians how we would steer Canada to be more competitive and innovative.

Over the course of the last few years Canada has fallen to the end of the line of OECD countries. The numbers speak for themselves, for standard Internet speeds, Canada’s average broadband monthly price was $26.11 in 2008, more than double the OECD average of $12.81. For high-speed broadband Internet service, the kind we need to power the cutting edge businesses of tomorrow and to enjoy things such as Video-on-demand and remote-teleconferencing, the average monthly bill in Canada was $87.32 a month in 2008, compared to the average of $59.10 for OECD countries. Canadian businesses and consumers are at a global disadvantage.

Below, you will find a series of Q&As we did with the Save Our Net Coalition. The Internet is the backbone of today’s flow of free ideas and sharing. The Liberal Party supports the principles of net neutrality and an open and competitive Internet environment.

–

Once a global leader in Internet infrastructure a number of recent studies have shown that Canada is falling further and further behind other developed countries on all measures of broadband.  International studies have found Canadian broadband expensive and slow – in both advertised and actual speeds.

Q.    Part of the problem is transparency.  ISPs advertise speeds based on available technologies, but do not guarantee they will provision their networks so as to provide these speeds on a best efforts basis.  Regulators across the world have begun measuring average speeds of the ISPs they regulate and forcing them to publish these when advertising services.  Will you act to impose such transparency here to make average speeds a competitive issue and force ISPs to invest more in infrastructure?

A.      The liberal party very much believes in greater transparency for all ISPs. Canada needs two things to improve cost, services and investment in infrastructure, and those are competition and greater transparency. With competition and the ability of Canadians to see the true level of service they receive, Canadians will be able to make clear choices and be better off.

Q.     ISP entry costs are extremely high, while per-user costs of maintaining customers once infrastructure is in place are relatively low.  This means it is extremely difficult for new entrants to establish a niche in the market or even to add next generation services to their existing repertoire.  Wholesale or unbundled access is essential if competition is to keep prices down and speeds high.  What steps will you take to ensure vibrant competition on Internet services?

The Liberal Party believes a strong wholesale regulatory regime is absolutely necessary to ensure competition in the provision of internet services. Other nations like the UK have implemented strong wholesale regulatory regimes and it has been shown to increase competition, reduce costs and improve service. Just a few months ago we called on the federal government to set clear principles and regulations for wholesale Internet service provision to allow more competition into the system, including:

•    Enabling new entrants fair and equitable wholesale access to incumbent Internet infrastructure at cost plus reasonable mark-ups;
•    Wholesale access pricing should be set transparently; and
•    Wholesale access pricing should be set to provide competitive return for investors of Internet infrastructure, while allowing access for new entrants to provide competition.

With regards to the recent cabinet decision on wholesale internet access: we oppose this decision, further consideration must be done. Canada’s internet policy must balance the need for companies to see a competitive return for investment in new infrastructure, and the need for competition. Without wholesale access, the only way a new entrant can enter into the market for internet service is to build an entirely parallel infrastructure system. This will stifle competition as well as investment. We are calling on the government to set clear principles and regulations for wholesale Internet service provision, at all speeds, that encourage investment and competition.

Q.    Usage based pricing is compounding pricing problems by allowing ISPs to pile on fees.  The CRTC is examining whether to allow incumbents to impose usage based pricing on wholesalers, effectively making the unlimited Internet connection a thing of the past in Canada.  What steps will you take to ensure wholesalers will be able to compete on all pricing packages?

A.     Ideally what we would like to do is look at international models like the UK and others. There’s no need to reinvent the wheel. Many other nations have also tried to address the issue of internet infrastructure investment and wholesale access. At the end of the day, we need a regime that has fair and transparent pricing that brings in competition into the internet service market. This will incent investment and fair prices for Canadians.

Compounding high cost and lack of speed and capacity, many Canadian ISPs have chosen to implement traffic management practices restricting user access to certain types of applications and online services.  This is done instead of greater investment in broadband, and is additionally discriminatory.  You are no doubt aware that the CRTC has recently issued a framework for monitoring discriminatory ISP interference with consumer and wholesale Internet access.  Whether this framework will be applied in a manner that will ensure an open Internet remains to be seen.  With this in mind,

Q.    Right now the onus is on consumers to bring traffic management complaints to CRTC. Would take the onus off of consumers by calling on the CRTC to conduct regular compliance audits of ISP traffic management practices?

A.     Yes, we support taking the onus off consumers. We would like to explore some kind of third-party model to provide Canadians with transparency on traffic management.

Q.    Do you think ISPs, as common carriers, should have a duty not to block, interfere with, discriminate against, impair or degrade the ability of any person to access any Internet service as a tool for preventing congestion?  If so, what steps are you willing to take to ensure this occurs [overturn contrary CRTC decisions? Pass legislation?  Retract the policy directive?]

A.     Yes. We agree with the position put forward by the Obama administration in the US. ISPs should not be able to discriminate and block or interfere in legitimate sites, users or applications. The Liberal Party, supports the principle of net neutrality and an open and competitive internet environment. We have called on the Conservatives to set clear principles and regulations with regards to net neutrality consistent with what is being proposed in the U.S.:

•    ISPs cannot prevent access of users to lawful content, applications and devices
•    ISPs must treat all lawful content, applications and services in a non-discriminatory manner; and
•    ISPs must disclose all information with regards to network management.
•    These net neutrality principles must apply to all Internet networks, including wireless networks.

Q.    Instead of adopting next generation traffic management equipment, a number of Canadian ISPs have chosen to deploy equipment that manages congestion in ways that are far more restrictive than necessary.  Assuming some form of technical congestion management becomes necessary at some point, how will you ensure ISPs invest enough to develop and adopt the least restrictive measures possible?

A.     Again, we believe competition and transparency are the keys. With competition and transparency on traffic management practices, we believe consumers will be empowered with choice. This will incent ISPs to invest in new technologies, to improve their services.

Q.    Will whatever measures you adopt with respect to congestion management apply equally or to a greater extent to an ISP attempting to impose fees on customers attempting to access third party content, services, or applications freely available on the public Internet through the ISP’s own networks?

A.     We do not believe ISPs should be able to throttle wholesale access. If ISPs can throttle their wholesale customers, this would limit competition and the ability of new entrants to differentiate their services.

While wireless poses different problems for broadband, it also raises the same issues that militate in favour of an open wireline Internet.  And wireless broadband is slated to play an increasingly central role in our lives.

Q.    Both the FCC and the CRTC have indicated that, in principle, the same openness requirements applied to wireline should apply to wireless broadband as well.  How, if at all, would you apply any measures adopted to ensure an open wireline Internet in the context of wireless broadband?

A.     We have called on the government to implement net neutrality rules on ISP traffic management on all internet networks, including wireless networks.

Canada’s low rural density poses special problems for broadband access.  Do you have a plan to provide incentives for ISPs to ensure rural areas receive better Internet services?  Potential options include:

Q.    Some governments have committed to providing public investment to spread minimal broadband access to rural areas.  Would you be willing to pursue such an option?

A.     Yes. Our leader Michael Ignatieff, has stated publicly that he wants to prioritize infrastructure dollars to strengthen internet connectivity in rural areas.

Q.    Other states have set industry targets aiming to ensure minimal broadband access (2 Mbps or higher) availability to all citizens. Would you be willing to pursue such an option?

A.     We have not completed our analysis on this concept but we are examining it now. It is certainly something we wish to explore.

Q.    Some states have declared Internet access to be a fundamental right.  A corollary of such a right is an obligation on the government to take steps to ensure a minimal level of open broadband access to all citizens.  Do you think Canada has arrived at or is approaching a stage where there is sufficient consensus on the importance of the Internet to justify such a recognition?

A. We have stated clearly, in a free and open democracy in the 21st century, in an innovative and progressive knowledge economy, no tool is more paramount than the internet. The internet is the backbone of today’s flow of free ideas and sharing.

We believe very strongly in an open and competitive internet environment. While I’m not sure on the internet as a fundamental right, as compared to the right to liberty, equality and other human rights, we do certainly believe, to truly build our nation and our economy, it is fundamental that all Canadians have access to the internet.