Informa: A comparison of broadband policy: Canada & Australia

CRICOS #00212K

Broadbanding the NationA comparison of policy in Canada & Australia

Michael de Percy

CRICOS #00212K

I have been comparing broadband outcomes in Canada and Australia since 2005

Samuel McGowan, a Canadian, brought the telegraph to Australia in 1853 (serendipity)

McGowan became Superintendent of Telegraph

The first private telegraph in Australia was shut down by the SA Colonial Government

Remember the railways!

Some history

CRICOS #00212K

OECD Ranking June 2008: Canada 10; Australia 16 Compared to 2004: Canada 2; Australia 23 Penetration: Canada 27.9/100; Australia 23.5/100 Households 2007: Canada 64%; Australia 52% Akamai Qtr 4, 2008:

Average speed: Canada 3786kbps; Australia 2499kbps >5mbps: Canada 20%; Australia 9.2% >2mbps: Canada 74%; Australia 49% Average price US: Canada $59-76; Australia $61-14

But, using the Big Mac Index calc on best plan: Canada 16mbps with 90GB download: AUD $75-21 Australia 16mbps with 60GB download: AUD $149-95

The Statistics

CRICOS #00212K

• McGowan brought a copy of the original Canadian legislation to Australia

• Australia has adopted many Canadian court decisions (telegraph… and other like services)

• Common carrier concept• Similar protection of domestic content in

broadcasting

Policy similarities

CRICOS #00212K

Australia: Build it and they will come

Canada: Build it or we will build it ourselves

Different approaches

CRICOS #00212K

• Australia: Federal Government has Constitutional responsibility; centralised federalism

• Canada: Originally Federal Government only had jurisdiction to interconnect provinces; decentralised federalism

• Australia: PMG/Telecom/Telstra natural monopoly• Canada: Provincial/regional natural monopolies• Australia: ACCC/ACMA (2004)• Canada: CRTC broadcast & telecoms since 1976

Policy differences

CRICOS #00212K

Australia:

The Telecommunications Act 1997 focuses on:

(a) the long-term interests of end-users of carriage services or of services provided by means of carriage services; and

(b) the efficiency and international competitiveness of the Australian telecommunications industry.

Policy differences

CRICOS #00212K

Canada:It is hereby affirmed that telecommunications performs an

essential role in the maintenance of Canada's identity and sovereignty and that the Canadian telecommunications policy has as its objectives:

(a) to facilitate the orderly development throughout Canada of a telecommunications system that serves to safeguard, enrich and strengthen the social and economic fabric of Canada and its regions;

(b) to render reliable and affordable telecommunications services of high quality accessible to Canadians in both urban and rural areas in all regions of Canada

Policy differences

CRICOS #00212K

• Forbearance: The Commission may… exempt any class of Canadian carriers from the… Act… where the Commission, after holding a public hearing… is satisfied that the exemption is consistent with the Canadian telecommunications policy objectives.

Regulatory differences

CRICOS #00212K

• Canada’s sectoral policy style enables faster deployment of broadband technologies and is more amenable to innovative practice.

• Importance of the configuration of the interest networks and coalitions that comprise [the] sectoral policy subsystem and affect its willingness and ability to propose and accommodate new policy ideas and actors

Research Findings

CRICOS #00212K

• Canadian governments (at all levels) facilitate cooperation between businesses and civil society organisations, particularly on a regional/provincial level, in deploying broadband technologies.

Research Findings

CRICOS #00212K

• A regional/local policy focus is more important than a national policy focus in deploying broadband technologies (centrality rather than centralised).

Research Findings

CRICOS #00212K

• Canada's integrated regulatory framework, combined with a broad range of powers which enable greater provincial, municipal and community involvement in broadband infrastructure deployment has contributed significantly to Canada's higher rates of broadband access and speed of the services.

Research Findings

CRICOS #00212K

Australia: Leo Gray in 1989:

• [W]e do not have a systematic body of communications law which allows new technologies and new uses for old technologies for that matter, to be conveniently slotted in to their correct place in a single integrated regulatory framework (cited on p. 29 of the 1989 Standing Committee on Transport and Communications Infrastructure Report)

The Past

CRICOS #00212K

Australia’s central control model hinders Problems will accelerate as diverged interests

converge Serendipitous but Canada’s model appears to

fast-track adoption and take-up

Explanations