CRTC delays Internet billing change; review pending

Ottawa confirmed it will not approve the CRTC's controversial move to allow some Internet service providers to charge its customers on usage instead of a flat fee.

CTV Edmonton: Sonia Sunger reports

Internet users in Alberta will still have to watch their online habits despite a decision from the CRTC to delay a recent policy. If you are a retail customer of a large Canadian Internet provider -- you will still have to pay if you go over your data limit.

CTV Winnipeg: Laura Lowe reports

The CRTC decision regarding usage-based billing is drawing responses across Canada and the federal government is wading into debate over proposed changes to Internet billing.

CTV Ottawa: Paul Brent on the CRTC's decision

The chairman of Canada's telecommunications regulator says that an Internet-billing change will be delayed for 60 days beyond the proposed March 1 introduction, while it reviews the decision.

CTV Toronto: About-face on Internet billing changes?

There's news for those who spend a lot of time online: potential billing practices that could have led to higher Internet fees may be dumped. Zuraidah Alman reports.

CTV Southwestern Ontario: Joel Bowey explains

Web users are all awaiting the outcome after the CRTC delayed a controversial decision on Internet billing.

CTV Toronto: Kris Abel, technology expert

What does all this mean to us at home, surfing the Internet? CTV's technology expert with what you need to know.

Watch: See all Videos in the Player

A A | Email This Email | Print | Comments (182) Tweet

Chariman of the CRTC Konrad von Finckenstein waits prior to his appearance before a House of Commons science and technology committee to discuss the billing practices of internet providers on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on Thursday, Feb. 3, 2011. (Pawel Dwulit / THE CANADIAN PRESS)

View Larger Image

CTV.ca News Staff

Date: Thu. Feb. 3 2011 10:48 PM ET

The chairman of Canada's telecommunications regulator says that an Internet-billing change will be delayed for 60 days beyond the proposed March 1 introduction, while it reviews the decision.

Last week, the Canadian Radio-Television Telecommunications Commission ruled that major Internet providers (ISPs) can charge smaller, independent companies according to the amount of bandwidth they use.

The decision sparked a public backlash. The federal government then sent a clear message to Konrad von Finckenstein that it expects the CRTC to reverse the ruling.

In fact, if the CRTC doesn't backtrack, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Industry Minister Tony Clement will take the matter into their own hands, a senior official told CTV on Wednesday.

Von Finckenstein was called before a Commons committee Thursday to explain the ruling, which effectively kills unlimited Internet download packages.

He told MPs that the change was made with the best interests of consumers at heart. He also said he had no contact with Clement, and that the decision to delay the billing change was made by the CRTC independently.

CTV's Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife said the backlash to the decision was immediate, with 250,000 people signing a petition on OpenMedia.ca in opposition to the decision.

Critics say the billing change would hurt competitiveness in an industry that already has too few big players.

The Conservatives quickly joined up with those lashing out against the CRTC ruling Tuesday, at a time when election speculation is rife in Ottawa.

Von Finckenstein said the review will focus on whether the change in billing practices would protects the majority of Internet users and penalize only those who are the heaviest consumers of Internet data.

"We are convinced that Internet services are no different than other public utilities and the vast majority of Internet users should not be asked to subsidize a small minority of heavy users," Von Finckenstein said.

"For us, it is a question of fundamental fairness."

With files from The Canadian Press

Comments are now closed for this story

cc
said

Greedy Hogs. The more money they want the more money they get and who do they get it from! People like us! If it wasn't for us, they would be paupers on the street! It will happen to them. What goes around comes around. It always works!

bill johnson
said

we should rebel if they put the new billing service in dont they understand it might cause a dramatic drop in the use of the internet thank you

Art
said

Prof. Pye Chartt I am one of those small businesses that you talk about I only hire the people I need, I don't pass on any profits that I make & neither does any other small business I know. It is you my friend that needs to get educated on tax cut for business. I get a new car, house , boat.... if I make extra money, I don't hire more people. Some years are poor and you need the extra cash. It's not passed on.

Pierre in Edmonton
said

Sounds to me like Canada's internet providers are running the CRTC and not Mr. von Finckenstein.

I'm tired of being ripped off.

island girl
said

I'm tired of corporations saying they need to increase rates to pay for infrastructure. If they used some of their earnings to PAY for infrastructure spread over years instead of paying big management/CEO bonuses and share dividends, maybe they wouldn't cry broke (or maybe they still would...out of greed)

DOL
said

This is gonna start a war! Enough already! Rich greedy people looking for more and more money. I'm on disability and use the internet to talk to family and friends that I can't see in person. Plus my kids are homeschooled they need the internet for their classes. God Almighty what next are they are gonna steal from us again. This really pisses me off. Having a hard time living as it is. Then this crap on top. Makes me want to leave this stupid country that's just a bunch of legal thieves.

Doug
said

The CRTC got it right. Let the user pay according to how much he/she uses. The CRTC is not capping the amount of download usage any individual can have. Download all you want but pay for it. Why should I, a low usage customer, have to subsidize the high user. The only role for the CRTC to play here is to ultimately regulate internet rates to ensure that they are fair and effective competition can be maintained.

CKinBC
said

@Prof. Pye CharttYou can use water mains / and water supply as a analogy all you want however that doesnt apply to the amount of data used.Congestion can occur if the links in our infrastructure or 100% used. However data is unlimited. The way they prevent this congestion is traffic shaping and bandwidth throttling. Which they already do, so this excuse to charge extra is just a money grab. The fact that the most expensive part of the infrastructure was subsidized by the govt should go against them (i know cause i was there with the engineers when it happened. This problem is not about limited bandwidth its about them charging for the unlimited data. Bandwidth = a rate of data transfer, bit rate or throughput, measured in bits per second (bps)"

Kevin B
said

Get rid of Konrad Von Finkenstein. From todays hearings, we have learned that he clearly has a lack of understanding of how the internet works. Get someone in charge that knows how it works and won't work in favour of businesses.

Prof. Pye Chartt
said

@ Danny Dinosaur: Apparently, somebody needs to give you the 411 on corporate taxes: "corporations" aren't all large, publicly-traded companies, as most are of small and medium size, and it is these that create the most jobs; most economists and business experts (including some notable Liberal politicians and politicos) favor a reduction in the rate of corporate tax, at this juncture, and; it is populist pandering Liberal/NDP propaganda that said "tax cut" is for "big greedy corporations" and bonuses for their "fat-cat" CEOs, as the economic correlation is factually weak for the former and foolishly absurd for the latter (especially in the case of public companies for which you aren't even an interested shareholder). There you go.

KD
said

This is the last straw! Seriously, how much more do "they" think we can afford? There is a huge problem with finance abuse from the working class folks. Our kids rely on the internet for school studies, but hey I guess we'll just go back to the library and go back to the old fashion ways, why not? I will NOT pay additional money and I don't know anyone who will... REVOLT citizens pull together, lets have OUR SAY in OUR country!

Shannon
said

Time to set new guidelines for the CRTC. They seem to have gone nuts in the things that they do.

Lauren Hendry
said

Can we buy the crtc out as of next week? An old czar from 1933 well, "tales" with billions once said, lambchops in the ceasors calander, Ilike the movement to see the owners fight to buy back owning innovative signals to connect a ring of alluring customers with money any ways spent on trend "leaning" to say, buy buy buy, then the crowds, disband such ring poorness in economic gains to try to reverse the old, as for competivive band wave owners, or owning your private signal? Hmm the old frequncies remind of 4hrtz yawing to see green spectrums emitt lighted effects on humans in 2012 qite zones from satilight sensory hesse beams? hmm? resovle? new privatetize now?hmm

Salt and Vinegar
said

Fire Von Finckenstein. The CRTC is a loose cannon that needs to be closely governed and monitored daily. The CRTC is not capable of making a decision in the interest of the Canadian citizens.

snowbound
said

The UBB decision today does not affect customers on Shaw since Shaw has peering arrangements and does not purchase their data capabilities from another major ISP.

Shaw recently reduced their monthly caps back to pre June 2010 levels. Shaw indicated that only 10% of their customers took advantage of the addtional data capabilities. Shortly after the reduction Shaw announced UBB.

Lynn
said

Am sick and tired of those fuddy duddies telling us what to watch on TV when the programming is so bad that the only up to date programmes are the news ,some of the programmes are so old and the same thing on ten channels get a life and get rid of the CRTC or get some decent programming get some young people in there I pay enough for all these services and am not happy

omg
said

People who disagree, stop compairing the internet to utility company's. Access to the Interent is not the same thing as having electricity, water or fuel... Which one would you miss the most if you had to give one up???

Claire - Ottawa
said

Really?? Haven't heard something as ludicrous in a bit... With the world going to everything being Web-based - including the government's own forms, etc., that have been free in paper form - now we'd be charged for using same on the Web, if we take more time to use them, along with other necesssary services? This is a farce, plain and simple.
Am thinking also of more and more schools at all levels, and therefore their students, that use the Web for all sorts of training and related activities. This sort of situation seems like a huge step backwards... Again - really???
This should be reversed, not just for 3 months, but forever!

Scottish Terror
said

60 day stall untill after the March election...then watch and see if Harper still cares. It's a Con stall.

crfcfanvi - Vancouver Island, BC
said

Shaw tells us that our tariff is $37 - on our bill it lists our cost at $50 but we get discounts to make it $37. That's just not right. Their flyer says $37, so that's what it should be on our bill. Discounts should come off that.We depend on Shaw to tell us our usage. That's not right - how can we verify and ensure no billing mistakes? You wouldn't have Hydro without a meter you can check, would you?I understand this is pretty groundbreaking to charge UBB - and I think it's a grab because we now have NetFlix in Canada and it's feared by the Cable companies. Whatever happened to open competition? What do businesses think about this? Now that the entire world is using the internet for Social Media, and business work in a virtual world. We as Canadians have become dependent on the Internet - and its use has been promoted by the Government . Money was provided all over the country to have access to computers and internet to the masses. We've been persuaded and now dependent on it.The suddenness of the decision and no public consultation - what do they think we wouldn't notice and wouldn't care? Just the same as HST in BC!The masses have spoken - wake up CRTC & Cable companies!

Denis
said

Pay Pay Pay I pay $50.00 a month to get high speed internet and the work I do I need it.plus my internet provider sold me an insurance of $15.00 so if i pass my so call 25 gig I have an extra 115 gig now tell me waht wrong here I dont understand why they want to charge extra for the low end provider , charge them not the public. we paying to mush right now like tax on tax on tax wake up people we need to do something about this

Tox
said

"....Internet services are no different than other public utilities ... the vast majority of ... users should not be asked to subsidize a small minority of heavy users," Von Finckenstein said."

Wonderful Idea Mr. Von Finckenstein!

I hope you get your way so that we can apply UBB to Employment Insurance, Welfare, Provincial Medical Insurance, School Boards, Public Transit, Highway Systems, Fire Departments, National & Provincial Parks, National Defence (Hey...maybe Afghanistan will pay us!), The RCMP and...well you get the idea. Now that I think about it...are any of my tax dollars funding the CRTC? I don't use the CRTC!

patrick murphy
said

rip off after fip off the more they make the more thfey want it stops now and i will vote for any one who stops it sin pat murphy

SVCR
said

NOT a good enough answer CRTC

SUPERSTARKS
said

Guess the PM was afraid his internet bill would go up.

Marlene Hodges
said

I do not feel I should be charged for amount of useage I would rather have a flat rateand know what I would be paying each month

NewsReader
said

those are excuse of the Big Internet Providers, they just want to protect their huge profit of market share! suppress smaller competitors! CRTC is the chess of Big Provider apparently! Sigh! The free business market protect. The providers invest on their investment, they should have their scheme, why need CRTC to protect their earning?

Grant In Ottawa
said

Although it's a good thing it's being delayed/reviewed, it should be completely thrown out.

Enough is enough - it's time to disband the CRTC completely and let consumers make their own choices and drive the market instead of constanly siding with the large corporations like Bell and Rogers.

Prof. Pye Chartt
said

@ tom91: As someone who understands the real estate development business, I can tell you that water mains are upgraded all the time, to enhance efficiency (ie. existing older areas) and volume (ie. new subdivisions). I'm standing by my analogy. Thanks, though.

Frank
said

Totally unacceptable! There should be a complete reversal without review! We are still being held hostage by the CRTC until they find another way to word the regulation so we can be stolen from in another way. These guys have never ever done anything to help the average Canadian. They just give carte blanche to these legalized crooks and it is time we stood up for ourselves. The write in and phones did their trick, but it is not finished yet. We still must keep pressure on our MP's and write ins until we see a complete reversal of this ruling. As long as there is a minority government we all have a fighting chance.

Michelle Groulx
said

This is like having a pay phone in your computer. Stupidest thing I've heard since the the OHIP tax!

Al-BC
said

Mark said "It's time to get rid of the CRTC. I don't want Canadian content on TV or the radio (who even listens to the radio), because all that CTV can come up with are idiotic Canadian versions of US reality shows" I've got a solution TURN OFF YOUR TV!!!.

Nick in Gatineau
said

Nice to see the Conservatives putting out their feleers as to what their electoral platform will be based on.Internet billing: Check.Hike Pardons, supporting an increase in poverty and crime: CheckMore prisons to fight the increase in crime: CheckMore acountability: Ch.. No. Not that one.Do the crime, do the time (as long as you you are not a member of the PC party): Check. Cut corporate taxes so they can streamline operations and have a fatter bottom line and cut more permanent jobs that the NEW head of statscan says are permanent (temp work has now become permanent): CHECK.Psst: Note to Cabinet: Canadians are morons so we can do whatever we want - even in a minority. Don't worry about a thing.

JC
said

The big guys are feeding CRTC....what else is new..that's politics for you.

Concerned
said

As citizens, if we have a radio, television, or telecommunications issue, we should bring it directly to the attention of the CRTC. The Prime Minister, or government of the day, should never interfere with an independent, arms-length commission. Never. This concern should be directed only to the CRTC. Government interference, positive or negative, should not be tolerated.

Terry
said

Hey shaw cable can complain about heavy users all they want. But did you see some of the big payouts to the president and ceos of shaw . I guess they cant complain they need more money when they just gave millions of dollars to former shaw employees. I cancelled my televion from shaw and told them to stick it.

JRPP
said

I just wish the Feds would exert that much energy in putting a cap on gas prices...

John Marvino
said

Not good enough! The CRTC thinks it can delay, confuse, and hopes to sneak through a watered down version another day...when the public isn't looking...The government needs to be uncompromising and clear on this issue. Overturn this anti-competition, anti-innovation, anti-consumer ruling...or make way for a government who will!

Prof. Pye Chartt
said

This forum has evolved into an amusing CRTC-bashing party. (I have little use for the Commission.) What makes me laugh is that, for certain, most of the angry "protestors" on the Liberal/NDP side of the political equation would be losing their marbles and flying into mouth-frothing anti-American and anti-Conservative tirades if our government suddenly decided to scrap the protectionist, maternalistic CRTC and open up the Canadian marketplace to genuine competition. All you "tough left-wing nuggets" would be ranting about how the Conservatives sold Canada out to the U.S. and how our precious "culture" was being summarily destroyed by the right-wing crusaders. You're not fooling anyone, my hypocritical lefties. This is all about YOU and your own little pocketbook; nothing more. You'd come running to the defense of the CRTC, and CBC, in unison with Ignatieff and Layton, if PM Harper placed the CRTC in the government's crosshairs.

JD
said

From what what has been reported, major telecom companies (Bell, Shaw, Rogers, Videotron), will still be allowed to impose UBB on their retail customers. Even with this latest decision.

oddmelee
said

Another money grab from our Government it does not matter who is in Power they are all the same--stick it to the public--Bell is the worst network --and anything the provincial (ONTARIO)does from vehicle licencing to anything elsr--cost us money

Down with CRTC
said

Dissolve the CRTC. They are nothing but a burdon to the taxpayers of this country and have lost their way. Irreperably as far as I'm concerned. Dissolve them.

Stanley in BC
said

I agre with Mark and others, it is time to get rid of the CRTC.
It is like anything else, if canadian radio or television is goint to survive then they need to get off the pot and provide what canadians want. or go the way of the DODO bird.
I watch very little canadian content because I in my opinion is narrow minded and bigoted.

Danny Dinosaur
said

Why don't we give the poor internet providers such as Bell a tax cut? We all know that this will reap big benefits for all of us. Right? You don't think they will simply use this to increase their profits in the same way they try to charge an extra nickel for every bit of service they provide? Mr. Flaherty said they would throw this money out to the hungry middle class. And how can we disagree with Mr. Flaherty? CRTC is simply following the same policies of supporting big business and forgetting about the tax payer, as the government and now they are going get punished for it. Nice job Steve.

reidjr
said

GordonMost of the world does have restrictions its not just canada.Americans can't watch what they want when they want thats the same for most of the world.

James
said

"If you own a home and you use more water, hydro, and natural gas than your neighbour, you pay more... and you should." ...yeah but all of those things are limited resources. Data (0's and 1's) is not a limited resource. (What's wrong with an 'all you can eat buffet' where the product you're consuming is unlimited?) The technology exists to easily handle the amount of data pushed through the networks, it's just that they (Bell, Rogers, etc) don't want to spend the money and keep up with the times. More and more content is online and more bandwidth is needed. This is a fact and Bell cannot stop this world wide trend. If Bell says they cannot handle the traffic, then they need to upgrade their networks, or I guess they need to ask the world to stop putting so much content online and ask companies like YouTube and Netflix to stop. Obviously that won't fly, so instead they turn to gouge their customers and penalize them for their lack of keeping up with the rest of the world.

Cam
said

Next they'll be charging for the time you have your radio turned on, good thing the liberals brought this issue to the forefront.

Chris
said

It is about time the "Communist Radio and Telecommunications Corp" was taken to task for it's constant stupidity and unfair policies. I just cannot help but wonder if this was year one of a majority government if we would see the same reaction from the PM. Now if we only get them to stop forcing us to watch those crappy Canadian commercials!

MLKNR
said

Simplly put I don't mind the ideal of UBB, but there shouldn't be a cap in anyway. Just price it comparable to other UBB stuff. Fuel, Electricity, or gas. Of course first they need to develop a certified way to track this. Since I don't think anyone should pay for all the internet spam. (charge the spammers for this) But billing should be made simple. Select your bandwidth. then use as much as you wish, just remember you'll pay for the ammount you use. But of course there has to be a live way to keep track of this for the user, a sort of fuel gauge. But of course all this has to be an Industry Canda Certified measurement. Not something decided by the ISP, but legally required if they wish to charge you UBB. Think of it this way, a normal person has to fuel up there vehicle about 1/week so that works out to be about $50/week. So if the regular user uses about 100 gigs/week charge them .25/ gig. works out to be $25/week Or have pre-paid packages. 100G, 250G, 500G, 1T at a discounted price, that an individual can purchase. Now these numbers are just examples to show the ideal.

Mark
said

It's time to get rid of the CRTC. I don't want Canadian content on TV or the radio (who even listens to the radio), because all that CTV can come up with are idiotic Canadian versions of US reality shows. CBC must be abusing some kind of tax loophole because all their home brewed shows never last past 2 seasons due to the crappy writers they employ. They just piss away tax payer money.As for Rogers and Bell, the government needs to step in and slap them with some kind of monopoly charges. Rogers has the only decent internet so people are pretty much forced to go with them, and they abuse that fact by exerting so much control over their customers. Throttling internet speed, stupid usage caps. As for Bell, their service just plain sucks, and they constantly lie in their commercials saying DSL is faster than Cable. IT ISN'T. Plus their usage caps are even lower that Rogers, so you pay way more.

Canoeman1
said

How much of the billions of $ that the major providers say they have sunk into the pipeline actually can in the way of government backed funding?

Rob Alberta
said

We can steel another 5 cents from our customers lets do it. This is the big buisness mentality here in Canada where we get robbed of evrey nickle they can take. Time for a major consumer revolt against some of these companies.

shawbrooke
said

I don't care how few people are affected at first. In the end they'd be charging everyone for every millisecond. Good thing that this was stopped now.

Gerry
said

Does the whole seller not buy the space from Bell or Rogers, If they want to sell at a lower price point is it not there option, after all they have already paid for it. They just didn't acquire this for free. Also if i bought 25 gig and only used 3 that leaves 22 for someone else to enjoy. I think in the long run it all equalizes out.I don't think it is about Bandwidth, it's all about more profit.

Salt an d Pepper
said

Imagine all companies that offer free public unsecured internet - they will have to lock it down to prevent downloading, or face excessive penalties. There will be no 'free' internet anywhere.

foolish
said

CRTC is a joke. They think they are thir own goverment. What makes us think they will listen to ours?Besides everyone knows Bell owns the CRTC, thats why CRTC shivers (or poops their pants( everytime Bell Says something.Friggin Bell is like the Leafs, don't care about winning or losing, lets just make as much money as possible.Well Like the leafs they dont care about customers either.Glad I cancelled my Bell Service, because you dont deserve to have me back

wileyone
said

Why dont we just say Bell = CRTC.Even when CRTC rules against Bell it's a slap on the wrist. When they rule for them it's a love making session which none of us want to watchI noticed that bell got slapped with calling people from the 'do not call' list. Hmm I am a former customer, but they still call, even though I asked them not too.So I guess what is good for Bell/CRTC is not good for us.So I ask you. Even though I don't owe (Not a cent, we are all paid up for their lousy service) anything to bell, and asked them to stop calling. Can I get a restraining order?

techprof - Toronto
said

A few random thoughts. It could potentially cost my students to get their lessons, papers, assignments or for that matter, operating system or antivirus updates?Perhaps this is merely a move to position the ISP's from loosing their cable and phone business revenues when everybody moves over to the internet? In some "wired" countries WIFI access is written into the constitution costing the taxpayer pennies. WIFI access is NOT entrusted to private enterprise. Access is a right not a privilege.

daveyboy
said

I don;t know why people just don't boycott Bell for a year. I think after that, Bell would be happy to get some consumer dollars rather than none.

Gordon
said

I agree with most, scrap the CRTC. Let Canadians join the rest of the free world, allow us to listen, watch, or download without restrictions

Cart
said

Wake up CRTC this is 2011.. everything should be faster, more open and cheaper.. not the opposite. CRTC is a farce

NS
said

I just canceled my Bell cellphone Plan; I will not be pushed around by a big company! Bell TV is next on my chopping block, just have to set up an appointment with a smaller provider, maybe Eastlink...

Sergy
said

The CRTC has this right!! Why should a little old lady who wants to e-mail her grandkids once a week be subsidizing some punk who watches TV online all day? If you drive more, we don't have "unlimited gas" packages. If you leave the lights on all day, we don't have "unlimited electricity" packages. Why should you be entitled to sponge off others in your use of the Internet? This is user pay, and that's how it should be.

KC-bby
said

Many people dodged a bullet and they have no idea how. As I sit here in my condo I am looking at 15 unsecured channels. If there was a cap I could easily login in to these channels and download to my hearts content - those people wouldnt suspect anything until their bill arrives in the mail. And disputing the bill with the big 3 would have been pointless. They don't care if you are an 80 yr old man who has no clue about security - they want your money PERIOD.

Big A
said

If companies like Rogers and Bell want to decrease their expenses, all they have to do is stop the heavy, glossy, full colour mailings I get weekly!!!!!!! 1 months worth of those would pay for my internet use over my limit. I get an average of 2 mailings per month from Rogers 1 in a cheap envelope, and 1 in an expensive folding brochure. These cost approx 15 cents to mail, and at least 75 to produce, and another 5 cents to distribute. that is approx 1.00 !!This is a cash grab. It is time that the CRTC do what the government says not tell the government what to do !!!!!

ouifyg
said

According to their own website "...the CRTC supervises and regulates Canadian broadcasting and telecommunications while remaining independent – so it can serve the needs and interests of Canadian citizens, industry and government...."This ruling serves my needs as a citizen very well. I will now be paying more money for less service. Way to go CRTC. Well done.

Bob
said

I agree with Sadie .. The cost of a decent TV package is over $70 a month and the programming we get is terrible.. If it wasn't for PBS and a few British programs I would cancel my subscription today ! Canadians can produce entertaining and educational TV, but they sure don't produce very much.

jon
said

another case of big business getting what they want , Bell and Rogers , wanting to put more money in their pockets.

scrap the CRTC , waste of money .

cheryl
said

I ALREADY pay based on usage(Rogers)--but, then, the government only seems to care if it affects their family--not mine... and the CRTC only protects big Canadian telecommunication companies--not real Canadians or their interests.

TheSnowLeopad
said

Hey people...look at your cell phone bill... your Network ACCESS FEE is promoted as required by CRTC. Get on the band wagon about this. This is a ridiculous charge that is just another cash grab!

Shoe
said

So, since I currently have a 60G cap with Rogers, does this mean that I will no longer have a cap? Will I be refunded the extra $$$ i paid due to overuse a couple months back??

John, Halifax, NS
said

"The major Internet providers argue that they sunk billions into the pipelines used to carry broadband Internet service, and need to be able to charge smaller companies for using the infrastructure, in order to pay back their investment."Actually, the tax payers of this wonderful country paid for that infrastructure, but of course Bell would love to claim it as theirs. It's not hard to tell who on here is a Bell/Rogers/Shaw employees.

CYL
said

CRTC has too much say and want too much control. We are paying way too much for cable, phone, internet. For TV, we have to pay for basic, CRAP !! so I'm forced to pay for basic PLUS, more CRAP !! I mainly watch 5 channels. Half the programs on basic and basic plus I do not watch yet I am paying for. SO, option, pay more for other services, CRAP !! I have complained about this for years, I deserve to have a credit for all the CRAP I am paying for over the years.

venice
said

Taking the claims of the telco's that streaming HD online content eats up bandwidth leaves me confused.To receive HD TV channels, only costs ~$20 more /month. If watching HD content takes up "space" on the same lines that feed the interent, how can I watch nothing but HD TV for an extra $20 /month yet be capped for internet traffic?This is so blatantly obvious nothing more then an attempt to stifle competition to the Telco's own streaming "on demand" services. It will be intersting to see how this plays out, as part of the CRTC mandate is to ensure fair competition for the consumer. This decision blantantly ignores "fair competition", so what repercussions are there for a federal agency that is not living up to its role? A resignation of senior staff (with golden handshakes and lucrative private sector job offers, no doubt) is NOT the answer. Only a fundamental revamp of the broken organization that is the CRTC will suffice.

alex
said

The CRTC forcing an internet provider to remove an unlimited internet package of which they clearly want to offer, is completely anti-competitive. How ironic that Netflix comes to Canada and this ruling has been passed. The big Canadian telcos charge outrageous amount of money for internet data usage, like on your cell phone, without an internet data plan it is 5 cents/KB, that's over $52,000 per gigabyte! This is just absolutely INSANE. The internet infrastructure is already in place. There is a minimal cost for maintenance and upgrades that costs pennies per gigabyte versus what the internet providers are charging the consumer. The media giants are running scared because of lost revenues for people canceling or reducing their TV packages or not buying as many newspapers or magazines. This is just pure gouging. This CRTC ruling must be stopped. The CRTC has completely failed its mandate to protect consumers from the big corporate industry.

B. Kelley, Ontario
said

Finally! Canadians are growing a pair and fighting back against the three ugly sisters who share a virtual triopoly in the Canadian telecommunications business and their partner in crime, the CRTC. Perhaps, for once, the best interests of consumers will be served ahead of corporate greed. This would also be a very opportune time to undertake a very critical review of the CRTC's mandate, objectives and operations or, better still, it's very existence. We live in a global society and the absurd cultural isolationism that forces mandated Canadian and French language content belong to a bygone era. If our service providers, programmers and talent base can't compete head to head with the rest of the world then they should fold their tents and quietly disappear into the night. It is no longer appropriate for them to hide behind a wall of cultural and economic protectionism. Canadian citizens are the customers and customers should always be free to choose who they will do business with and what they will buy. Forcing Canadian content and providers is no different than forcing Canadian soap, cars or septic tanks on the consuming public. Let's all bid a hearty "welcome to the 21st century" to our elected and appointed government representatives.

Yvan
said

Internet is not a system which is there for every one to use without someone servicing it.
I have been paying the "capped" survice all the time. The charges are reasonable.

Because of the junk programs on the net, people are being fed with unwanted programmes without knowing it. Before most of the user know how much bandwidth they are using. They have software on the PC to monitor usage. Now the bandwidth is free, there are lots of abuse on the net by advertisers.
I have disabled the flash player plug-in and enable it when I need to view my program. Controlling the internet usuage is similar to controlling your money spending. I would not allow my children to surf with unlimited bandwidth. Improper use of internett is a great time waster which affect their school work. Lap-top neworking to do homework is not a desirable mode of studying.

The real issue right now is that the peope who can make money with Internet for themselves, suddenly found that their source of income has reduced by the regulation. They are the one who are opposing the CRTC ruling.

Bruce Caves
said

by all means we should be allwed unlimited band width. We use cogeco cable in Halton Hills. My son 42years & three life long friends play the on line games. They charge us $56.00 per month which our son pays half, and every month almost, there are extra charges for going beyond the so called band width limit.

aclinton
said

For years internet users in the NWT and the Yukon have had a cap on internet use with hefty charges for over use. Some heavy users have recieved bills of over $1000.00 in "over use" charges. None of the political parties are jumping to our defence!

CMQ
said

The big companies, of which I subscribe through, give me a great bundle package on cell phone, long distance and internet usage and they are still making lots of money. In short, this would seem to indicate that they have regained all they have invested or will. All the big comapnies want is to control competition so that they won't have to give guys like me an even better deal than they already are to compete. When was the last time you heard of Bell and or Rogers being in the news for losing money? Correct me if I'm wrong but it hasn't been lately. Nice to see action being taken on this goes to show people can make the government take notice!!!!

Sadie
said

the CRTC is clearly in need of a clear out - as this group is clearly not in touch with today's world and nor are they looking at the needs and wants of the consumers... Rogers - Bell and any other provider are also not looking at the best interest of their clients... am at the point that i may want to cancel my cable etc the costs are just getting to much out of reach as a reasonable living expense..

joelmc
said

As if the 'major Internet providers' haven't made their money back already. It's not like the Internet is a new thing! This is just a matter of corporate greed -- their profits are more important to them than the people who use their product.

Alan
said

Good for Mr. Harper I know a a lot of young people will be voting for him in the next election for that move. They find it pretty hard to believe the Harper government would do something against big business just because it's the right thing to do. His sweaters might be ugly but he is a good man.

Dave Meadows
said

Hi This rip off of consumers has GOT TO STOP
Get rid of CRTC and their Buddies Rogers And Bell NOW!!!

From MEDIVAD {Dave Meadows}

ANTONIO LUCIDO
said

I just want to to add my opinion
this is all about the big providers that they can control everything charge what they want at the same time killing the competinion.I hope the government will reverse the desicion in favor of wha the people want and the small providers.

reidjr
said

Michael People should have the choice it should not be 2 companys that control everything.

Time for Change
said

The CRTC should be disbanded, as they only seem to be 'protecting' Canadian identity if there is a fee associated.

They embarass me!

willar
said

The CRTC knows the day is not far away when everything will be 'wireless' - it's a money grab is all!

tom91
said

Pye Chart, it is not like water. The technology for internet communication is always evolving. You will not be able to pump more water through the same pipe in 10 years time, but you will be able to pump more data from existing copper and fiber optics, it's just a matter of upgradig technology, which is inevitable, so why try to delay it. Canada is already behind many countries in terms of what you get for what you pay. With what we pay, Bell internet should also get me a beer from teh kitchen and wash my dishes. If anyone beleives that caps are necessary or mandatory then they are a dinosaur and ignorant. Moreover, this is more a matter of big players lobbying the gov't to impose restrictive rules to cripple their competition and secure their molopolies for just a little longer.

David
said

Funny thing ... I haven't heard about the discounts light internet user's will get ... only the charges for heavy users. So they take the bandwidth I don't use and sell it a second time to someone else? This is fair?

reidjr
said

Larry in WpNo most use far far more then 5gb only very very light users use less then 5gb.

Cam
said

The conservatives may have been slow to react, but at least they got the message. They should abolish the CRTC and also stop Bell and Roger�s from throttling the bandwidth of subscribers and small Internet providers. The CRTC needs to stop enabling these companies and do what�s best for competition and the people.

Salt and Vinegar
said

Fire von Finckenstein. Bell also needs to be held accountable to its shareholders, as to why Bell has to change business plans to make profit. The consumer should not be held accountable and pay for Bell's bad business plans.

CementBrain
said

This just boils down to a country of dictatorship and soon, a communist country. The CRTC, Bell, Roger and all the large corporations are ramming whatever they want down our throats. Why is it that we they only offered us 25G a month while Quebec get 60G? Because Bell owns Quebec!! All these major corporations and utility companies are jacking us for every loonie and toonie that we can scrounge up. The government needs to step up and STOP shafting the little guy that only make minimum wage of a measly $11.25 per hour. Want us to pay more, let us earn more, so we have a fair chance to make a living!! Time to get real!!

Elizabeth, Ontario
said

So Bell and Rogers want a monopoly on internet use? Thank you PM Harper for putting a stop to these bullies. Internet use is already too expensive. The CRTC needs to go! It appears they are in the pocket of Bell & Rogers anyway. We need the smaller providers to keep the big bully-companies honest.

William
said

I believe the CRTC should be disbanded. I have worked and been associated with the broadcast industry for 38 years and have watched the programming deteriorate to the point of over 200 channels with nothing to watch of any value. All of this done under the guise of more Canadian Content. Thankfully, the Canadian People have spoken and the Government is listening...having hopefully put a stop to limiting bandwith on the internet, now to deal with the quality of television viewing disregarding the country of origin.

Bcogeco.carian
said

It is my understanding that we in Ontario pay the highest rate in the world for internet useage and this is just another money grab on the little people. Enough is enough. Unlimited Internet should be a given.

Sam
said

Why do we need CRTC to begin with when they are nothing but being a yes man to the big communication companies anyway. We should get rid of CRTC and let competition to determine where the market should be.

JH Ptbo
said

The CRTC has been out of touch with the public for many, many years. Just look at the booming satellite radio industry, which started by bypassing the CRTC and offering content the CRTC doesn't want you to have. Now they want to limit internet bandwidth - fearing TV is heading the same as radio - out of their control.

Rachel
said

Is this going to force Bell to backtrack for those clients they already started to cap?

Frank
said

If Bell and Rogers get away with this, it may mean the end of the internet as we know it. Not only that but it will be a foot in the door to never ending price hikes. In case many of you have not noticed, all the pages you open are using more bandwidth than they did a year ago. All of the internet sites are more sofisticated, even Bell sympaticos' home page has a lot more videos when you log on to it. 5 years ago normal surfing and usage of the internet was 25% of the same usage now. Do you think that the big 2 providers are going to raise there usage limit before you pay as each page uses more and more bandwidth? I doubt it. Its time for many of us to move to the smaller guys in an organized way. Only then the big 2 will bow to us instead of us to them.

T
said

Harper is only on board because he wants Von Finkenstein out as he did late in 2010 because CRTC ruled against "Fox News North". Let's see through the fog on this one. He also made the jump before other parties because obviously this would be a hot-bed issue with the general public.

Dan
said

If the price goes up with this stuip CRTC rulling then I stop using the internet. No customers will change their minds pretty quickly. DUMB idea, and nothing but a money grab!

Jodi Lee Kaemingk
said

I hope they reverse this, I live in the north and there is no such thing as unlimited downloads and streaming. It really sucks! I hope the rest of Canada doesn't have to go through what we go through up here.

ivan
said

The Cons. deserve no credit for this. It was their appointees who made this decision, they said nothing after the decision was made. It was only after outside groups, the public, and the other parties got involved did they even comment on this issue.

Knows What's Up
said

This move by Bell and Rogers had nothing to do with crushing small ISP companies.

It was simply a business decision, backed by the corrupt CRT, to protect their profits from their movie packages, PPV and VOD fom the $8/month Netflix.

Not only should the CRTC be aboilshed as an absolute waste of the taxpayers money; new legislation needs to be passed to separate the content providers from the pipe owners.

The Soviet system doesn't work - it failed in the 20th century in the USSR; it will fail in Canada in the 21st century

Michael
said

This is a joke. All Bell Canada and Rogers wants to do is limit the competition and control how we do thing. There is a lot of alternative media out there; streaming traditional TV from the internet, rather that paying $100s for traditional cable and Bells i-TV... Clearly the CRTC is not acting in the best interest of competition.

Mike
said

This story shouldn't be about unlimited or limited, capped or uncapped, it's about fair competition where individuals and small companies can make choices and decisions without having the big corporations bullying them around! The CTRC is an obselete entity in which decisions are made by friends of friends and money, it's never about protecting the little guy and consumers.

JEAN-GUY
said

The CRTC should be totaly dissolved,and replaced with a governing panel.That operates for the protection,and rights of the consumer.And not for private enterprize,or personal preferances.Cable companies have been ripping the public off for years.It's cost them millions to provide a service,but they have recouped their investment,by ten folds.Now it's time for the Bills to drop to more affordable prices.

Jay
said

There's a fair bit of misinformation and spin out there.

If you do not completely understand the full debate and the issue around this policy I suggest you read this piece by Michael Geist.

http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/5611/125/

This is clearly an attempt by the oligopoly to control the networks in Canada and protect their massive profits. This is a huge step back for Canada in terms of competition and innovation.

Homer
said

This decision should NEVER have been tabled. It costs the big companies 2-3 pennies per gigabyte per person. That works out to roughly $2 for my 60 gb cap. So why is my bill at this moment $50 woth a 60 gb cap and $2.00 for every gb over? I use 200 gb a month because I cut out my cable. Too many commercials. Infact, it felt like the commercials were the programs and the programs I wanted were the filler. I use Apple TV, Netflix, etc now to get my media. My bill could go up to $300 per month! They can say infrastructure but I know that is BS because they are already making $48 a month profit off of me alone. Also, taxpayers helped pay for most of the infrastructure back in the 90's. SO in the end why are they doing this? People are dropping cable TV at a very fast rate and swithcing to full internet like me. This is a way for them to protect themselves. I think that what they are doing should be illegal. I wonder how much money the CRTC got to make this happen?

Jim-Surrey
said

Well to the Liberal back patters you should know the ONLY reason they speak up is so YOU think they care about us! They never have and never will so don't get your hopes too high.The only ones that benefit from Federal Liberals are the Eastern Provinces the rest of us are ignored!!!

Plabo
said

The billions of dollars being claimed as infrastructure expenses could be valid if salaries and ** bonuses ** are part of balance sheet.

Gord
said

Wind Mobile, Potash now this. This guy Clement sure is big on net benefits for Canadians. These companies that dominate lucked into it all or were connected or both. Most did not spend bigtime like they'd like us to believe to set up their infrastructure. For my money, Clement made the right call again. It is not only politically astute, but it continues to make open access affordable for us all. Congratulations again, Minister Clement.

Trevor Tales
said

The Government is making the right decision. This is such great news.

URU
said

Grilled today - NO CHANGES tomorrow!What else is new, until an uproar from the public demanding more to be done - and only when the situation escalates is when the Gov't prolong the move!!!!!!!!

Freedom Fighter
said

Just another way for big corporations to charge more and give less. The CRTC must go. Don't have much to say. What's important is that I added to this forum showing that another Canadian is fed up with this kind of stuff.

Boss900
said

I believe the whole board should resign. Young Canadian flooding parliament with complaints? Of course - we are the future - and the future is now. Just because the baby boomers (board of CRTC) don't see the need for bandwidth should not justify the ruling. This is what the world is coming to, bandwidth should not have a PRICE - The internet does not care how much bandwidth you use.

Prof. Pye Chartt
said

The same logic behind charging for water usage applies. Though H2O appears to exist in unlimited form, our governing system of delivering fresh water is limiting; hence, in the Greater Toronto Area, with massive Great Lakes in proximity, water rationing is often employed during dry summer periods. In terms of the internet, our governing "system" CANNOT support unlimited usage. Collectively, we could easily "crash" our own system, as the delivery conduit is limiting. It only makes sense that we initiate a pay-for-use override, and introduce economic fairness to the inherent cost structure. HOWEVER, because we have a meddlesome, over-protective, culture-engineering, market-phobic CRTC, we don't possess a free and balanced marketplace in Canada for delivery and service. That's the problem. The notion that the Liberals are any type of "saviour" in this issue is both foolish and laughable. This isn't a partisan problem; it's a fundamental economic market-structure problem aided and abetted by our maternalistic and dysfunctional CRTC.

JDsteve
said

What I would like examined is who is paying who, as it is not obvious the CRTC Chairman has enjoyed unlimited internet use at no cost. Yet here he is wanting to have the little person (whoops) the average taxpayer pay for his usage. Also here is a prime example of why there should be more internet providers allowed. So that the 2 - 3 largest companies which provide the average Canadian don't have the monoply and would be forced to charge a more reasonable rate for what most would call a limited service anyways.

GC
said

The argument now is how much should heavy users be billed. The total cost for transmitting one GB is only 3 cents. If you take into account a reasonable profit margin, say 7 cents, the charge for each extra one GB should be around 10 cents. Now they are charging $2.00/GB? It's better than digging gold.

Lindsey
said

Jeremy - The advertisers are already paying your cable bill. While I agree that cable is too expensive, I know from experience that television is very costly to produce and prices are subsidized by the selling of ad space. I made the decision not to bother with cable and have never looked back. If you really hate advertising, you may want to consider doing the same.

Matt in Edmonton
said

@Larry in WPG.. I agree with you that the internet has a finite infrastructure. I don't have a problem with companies being able to profit from their systems either. But we're a captive market in Canada with no outside competition allowed. The CRTC shouldn't let Bell, Rogers and Telus have their cakes and eat ours too. If the big Canadian Telcos can get the CRTC to remove billing restrictions they should have to compete with foreign owned companies and let the market decide.

John
said

I always find it interesting how users that feel they don't utilize the bandwidth think it means cheaper internet if they go to this system. Funny thing is billing will stay the same caps will be introduced and for users that exceed the cap they will pay overages... so not getting cheaper and the network will still be bogged down just more revenue for the service provider at the end of the day. Another alternative is these service providers can start actually making attempts to finish the final mile infrastructure and utilizing fibre optics correctly... or exploring sonet technology but who am I to say I am just that ignorant power-user that is aware of superior CHEAPER technologies in other countries making you email users lives hard... According to your ISP.

Gary
said

Get rid of the useless CRTC as they are only for the BIG business.

BMIA
said

These companies did not spend billions on their infrastructure. They may have done some creative accounting to attribute those costs to the infrastructure but they certainly didn't spend billions on it. The government spent billions of dollars on the infrastructure. Then when they started selling off all of their crown corporations the companies like Telus, Bell, and Rogers bought these comapnies at a fraction of the cost. And let's face it, without the government to assist in the building of the infrastructure it, simply, wouldn't have gotten done - that isn't in dispute. Companies spending money on equipment is one thing, but to claim billions of dollars spent on the infrastructure is dead wrong.

Steve
said

The big players aren't the only ones who have sunk billions into the "pipe". Govt partnering, grants, etc. have also done this. That means we've paid partly for it through taxes. It seems that the big operators want all the credit and all our cash.

Rik
said

Wow....sounds like a page of people wanting everything for nothing...kinda like daytime Fox viewers.
1-800-Victim-2 anyone?

Gomtor
said

How does the CRTC work for freedom of speech?

viral venus
said

I would have thought that a government that has just given away billions in corporate welfare in the form of massive tax cuts would approve of taking more money away from ordinary citizen's and depositing it directly in the pockets of large corporations. I keep forgetting that politicians have no vision except for having both eyes locked on their own fortunes and potential for re-election.

Chris
said

Im glad there's talk about this. The rulings fundamentally squash any chances of Canada competing globally in virtual markets. Media is everything on the internet. A person could burn through 25gb in youtube alone. Netflix becomes more costly than renting movies and lets face it, cable/satelite is losing ground due to excessive advertising. Online media evens the playing field for both advertisers and users. HD video is in it's infancy and requires large amounts of data. Do we really want to lose the ability to embrace Hi-DEF? Bell, rogers and the CRTC seem to love the idea. Gives their own services more ground (Monopoly)The data rates being charged by rogers alone are outlandish. $1.50 per GB extra? Bandwidth costs less than $0.15 per GB..This is all a money grab,, has nothing to do with penalizing heavy users. Heavy users had to pay extra with higher packages and surcharges anyways. Profit is already recouped that way. Has everything to do with wanting to make more money off medium users to light users.Even the US would never push anything like this. It would kill the virtual economy doing so. As a webmaster this would make my business model in Canada useless and the costs of uploading content to my web portals would become outlandish.

George Burger FTW
said

Good triumphs over Evil once again.
Tony Clement sticks up for the consumers just like he did in the Wind mobile decision.

For those questioning he timing,Tony couldn't do anything until the appeals process was over with the CRTC, which was Jan 31. The Liberals had NOTHING do do with this decision, they only jumped on the bandwagon after the NDP showed genuine concern over the OpenMedia.com petition.

More clarification here:
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110201/crtc-internet-usage-110201/

george
said

Initially no political parties were involved in this issue.Openmedia.ca is the guys who bought this into attention.They are the guys who gave us the opportunity to voice our protest.If CRTC revereses,I think the credit goes to OPENMEDIA.CA.

Extreme Makeover needed for CRTC
said

[X] Conservatives have MY vote on this subject. There is one choice right now for rational thinking Canadians and it isn't Mr. Ignatieff the "the lover of lace". This is the right move in the interests of consumers. The large corporations have the infrastructure in place and are making huge profits while many other businesses are still struggling. I don't share their desire for per unit billing. We don't limit our telephone service so why limit the Internet? Time for CRTC to experience an "Extreme Makeover".

Gail
said

I sure hope this is reversed; this is the most ridiculous thing ever. If they do reverse it; does that mean we will get reimbursed for the overage charges that my carrier has been charging me every month since this went into effect; and the extra money i had to pay for the upgrades to my service.

Julian
said

I applaud the government for stepping in and standing up for the people.

As others have noted, putting in caps on bandwidth is a major step backwards, when it's high time the industry in Canada started making further steps forward.

Funny how the CRTC and the ISP's tried to sneak this one by us.

Good on the media for bringing it out into the open and keeping us all well informed!

Mr.House
said

The outcome of this will definately decide my vote for the next election.Do not pass this bill!!! We must write our members of paliament and the CRTC about our feelings on this issue.

Kim in Calgary
said

Harper is again acting in a reactionary way...any surprise here. He misses the eight ball on most important issues to Canadians. As for the CRTC, when you have industry watchdogs it is more often that those watching are for the industry players or where from the industry players. No conflict of interest here!

Anthony
said

I fail to understand why some writers in here always mix Harper into any decision made by either a government or a non governmental agency.The CRTC was established by Parliament in 1968, after a white paper on satellite telecommunications was released and the first televised debate by leaders of political parties in Canada (a joint CBC/CTV production) took place. The Broadcasting Act was passed. The Act did the following: created the Canadian Radio-television Commission (CRTC), a new regulatory agency that became the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) in 1976. It would be fair to point out that since 1968 to 1979 the party in power were liberals, whose PM brought us the Charter, for which we, the taxpayers, have already been paying for dearly.So the next time, when some of you start complaining about Harper look at the alternatives ! Not much hope there, is there.

Max
said

Hope the Government would also do something at the gas pumps

Berzerk
said

Now will they get MY ISP to stop telling me I am being ridiculous for wanting more than 15GB a month.....cause that really stinks.

Richard in Vancouver
said

This is great! Glad this is being resolved sooner than later. ..... Next!!!Cell phone rates!!!!

Jeremy
said

Harper go after them for the amount of commercials I have to watch. I pay for Cable so why am I forced to watch commercial after commercial. I watch an hour long show and more then half of it is commercials. Cable should be free if we are forced to watch commercials. The advertisers should be paying my cable bill. I pay to watch shows and movies I enjoy. I don't pay to watch commercials.

Aaron
said

I don't think that the the Companies who own the wires should be premitted to provide access to the network too. These should be 2 seperate businesses not relaited. This would ensure fare free market pricing.

Carl M
said

This is the same as paying a monthly cable bill and then having to pay an additional fee for each show you watch over a certain amount.

Jason
said

All political parties are on side? and working for us? I know it's cold here but hell must have just frozen over. WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Eddy S
said

Thank you liberals for bringing this issue to the fore front. The liberals have always worked for the Canadian people. If an election wasn't around the corner the cons would have sided with the CRTC & would allow these charges if they had a majority. Thank goodness we have the opposition parties working for Canadians. The corporate tax cuts will be the main election issue & my vote doesn't support the conservatives plan for higher taxes for me & lower taxes for wealthy corporations.

Roadrobber
said

Wendy said "Unfortunately, the large telecoms are part of the Conservative base and a significant source of political donations." What Wendy didn't mention is that Corporations, trade unions, and other unincorporated associations are prohibited from making contributions to registered parties, registered electoral district associations, leadership and nomination contestants of registered parties, and all candidates. Individuals can donate up to about $1,100 I believe. Let's have some truth in posting please.

AW in GTA
said

With enough voices speaking out, the government is finally listening. The big telecoms went too far in this case, and they must have thought they could get away with this like they did with those outrageous cell phone and cable plans. For people who use internet other than merely checking emails or reading the news, 25GB cap is simply not enough, especially when a whole family with young people shares it. The big telecoms know this and want to squeeze as much money out of users in over-use fee as possible. And those fees are nothing but highway robbery when the cost of delivering a GB is only $0.01-0.03, while we are charged $2-5 for them.

Andrew
said

We don't need CRTC, they only work for Rogers and Bell

A from Montreal
said

"streams HD video to his office.." Gee i wonder why the speeds suck nowadays.
If you need that much bandwidth pay for it.
In the end they will just add an infrastructure improvement fee that everyone will pay, vs charging only those that hog all the bandwidth.

J.W.
said

We are already paying to much for internet along with phone and TV compared to world average and let's suck some more $$$ out of the over taxed Canadian.

Steve from Scarborough
said

While I understand the complaints on this specific ruling, there is a deeper issue in place here. How is it fair that a company can put up towers, run cables, etc. to set up a network and then are forced to hand over the service to some other company? That is what is happening with internet. Bell, Rogers, etc. set up the network and then they're being forced to allow these other guys to use it, and they didn't put any money into setting up the network. I don't blame them for wanting to charge for high usage since that high usage often slows down the network. This would be like you paying $30K for a new car and the government said you had to allow someone living on a fixed-income to drive your car whenever they needed it, as long as they put gas in it.The entire system needs to be overhauled to make it fair for everyone.

Tomcat
said

The major Internet providers argue that they sunk billions into the pipelines used to carry broadband Internet service, and need to be able to charge smaller companies for using the infrastructure, in order to pay back their investment.

Maybe the major internet providers should have to pay back the Canadian taxpayers who sunk billions into the thousands of miles of poles and wires criss-crossing the country, before it was all handed over.

AC From TO
said

Finally!The CRTC should be dissolved over this! I can't believe even in some twisted way...this could be "GOOD" for consumers! It is only good for the BIG Telcos! That's it! Anyone who listens to the people, has got my vote! Con, Lib, NDP, Green...whatever, my voice is my voice, and that's what should count! The only thing that worries my now, is what other tricks, the Telcos and the CRTC have over this. If Bell complains that their infrastructural is too costly to maintain, then sell it! Open it up for all companies to use fairly.

Larry in Wpg
said

The internet is not a "virtual" entity with unlimited resources. It consists of physical links and physical devices, each of which has a finite capacity. If everyone connected to the internet exercises their "right" to unlimited downloading, it will crash. Every single piece has been built on the premise that it is a shared resource and each user is active only part of the time. The majority of internet subscribers use less than 5 Gbytes per month to surf the web and do their email. So why should they have to pay the same as the power users ? Kind of like if the Prius owners had to help fill the tanks for the ego-tripping guys who have to drive Hummers. If you use it, you should pay for it. It ain't free and someone is always paying the shot.

Richard C
said

Get rid of this usless bunch of old foggies...but before you do investigate for favors and kickbacks.This will ensure a large number of votes for the team that comes through

hunter
said

CRTC has never cared about Canadians. It is out there for the big Buisness. They will Loonie and Toonie all Canadians to death. They need to be put in there place and have their place retooled.

Sherry
said

It is past time for the CRTC to be disbanded. Canada cannot move forward and take full advantage of today's technology until we stop letting small groups of bureaucratic boards govern us.Get rid of the CRTC!!

Gorden
said

I don't understand what all the complaints are about. Internet usage is like any other utility. For power, telephone, water, or home heat, we pay based on usage. The more you use, the more you pay. Why should the internet be any different?

Paul
said

If Harper would only listen to the people more, think of all the votes he would get. I myself, am not concerned with the CRTC's ruling and could even care less that Harper is "with the people on this one". A little too late for my vote, Stevie.

Wendy
said

If the consumer is given unfettered and reasonably priced internet access then I commend the minority government for the decision to influence the CRTC in this decision to rework their decision. Unfortunately, the large telecoms are part of the Conservative base and a significant source of political donations. We will have to wait and see what direction the CRTC takes and whether the consumer will benefit or whether the telecoms will seek another angle to increase their already obscene profits. Canada, once a leader in the digital age is now a victim of corporate greed and has become a distant follower.

Northern Girl
said

It wasn't the Liberals who brought attention to this! In fact it was openmedia.ca who have been around for a few years who brought it to everyone's attention. NDP were onboard first, and then the Liberals. Good for the Harper Gov't for listening to the people too. Over 330,000 names on the petition now.

marcel messier
said

Everyone must understand that this has nothing to do with small companies not being able to afford to sell unlimited packages. It has to do with large providers like Rogers and Bell to get more money out of our pocket. Rogers put this plan in place a year ago, limiting me to 25Gb. As Rogers has done in the past, forcing me little by little to increase my download speed, their next plan is to lower the 25 to 20, to 15, etc.

Will
said

+1 for the consumer....for once!
This was a step towards eliminating Bell and Rogers competition in the wake of Netflix and Internet television. We all know that Satellite and Cable are on their way out with their ridiculous rates and lack of choice and flexibility.
By eliminating "Unlimited" plans, people will have no choice but to go with "the big boys" for online TV and (legal) movies, or pay through the nose for bandwidth.

MKR
said

good job Mr Harper, this act truly shows that you do care about the Canadian citizen and their well being. CRTC is crap anyways

Tony - Montreal
said

Isn't there any election coming soon?? I've never been a big fan of Harper, but you got to give him credit. The man knows what he's doing. He's certainly out to please the 18-25 age demographic.

Dazed_and_confused
said

I don't get what his thinking was... my digital TV (incl. VOD) and my internet come into the house on the SAME LINE. By this logic, the amount of TV I watch should also fall under the same cap.Either cap everything, or cap nothing.

Robert
said

"The major Internet providers argue that they sunk billions into the pipelines used to carry broadband Internet service, and need to be able to charge smaller companies for using the infrastructure, in order to pay back their investment."These companies make millions every quarter and yet still looking to squeeze out more from hard working Canadians. This is just utter corporate greed and the morons at the CRTC who mostly likely benefit from their stupid decisions in some form or other should be thrown to the lions.

Shelby
said

@MichaelThe Liberals and NDP were also against this, not just the Conservatives.

Sue
said

The conservatives pretty much had to take the view of the liberals to keep votes. If we had a conservative majority things would be different. We'd be getting gouged even more by big business.

Brandon
said

I'm pretty sure that these large companies were given generous tax breaks for years for the upgrade to there grids and infrastructures. How can they post billions and billions on tax break years to come back and say "we" need more money.

Stu
said

I'm pleased that the liberals raised this issue, if left to the conservatives they would have let their buddies in big business to keep gouging us. This would have been a slipper slope if allowed to continue. What was next charging a base rate plus the amount you watch TV or local phone calls. Thanks for the liberals standing up for Canadians. No more corporate handouts.

Michael (Ottawa)
said

Another good reason why I and my family will vote Conservative should Michael Ignatieff attempt to force an unwanted election. The internet is an essential service in today's world and giving these oligarchs free reign to rule the Internet lanes without competition is archaic protectionist thinking and counter to the interests of consumers.

For all Canadians
said

Mr. Finckenstien, I believe the clock is ticking - Your resignation please!

Ken Beatty
said

This is a step in the right direction. The CRTC needs to be disbanded. Their crony-ism with Canadian industry has consistently stifled competition and turned Canada into a digital backwater.

George V.
said

Great news. Better late than never. Good recovery.

Richard in New Brunswick
said

If decisions made by the CRTC are allowed to stand subject to government-of-the-day approval, then I would like to see it disbanded and a small - repeat SMALL - non-partisan subcommittee of Parliament set up in its place. Even though I often have problems even with what Parliamentarians pass into law, I have even more aversion to these CRTC-type, unelected, self-important autocrats lording it over us. I say let the ISPs battle out their fee schemes in the free market but keep a VERY close monitor in place to ensure they don't collude to form a cartel to remove MEANINGFUL choices from the consumers. The time to do it is NOW before it's too late as it is with oil companies and TV providers.

Michael in Ottawa
said

This ongoing purge against consumers wallets by the CRTC in favor of large and greedy corporations has to stop NOW. It's time the CRTC board stopped propping up these companies and let free enterprise take its course. This is the same gang that was supposed to look after reflecting Canadian culture in our media - this is the same gang of losers that decided allowed porn should be available into our homes. Time to clip the CRTC's wings in my view.

tom91
said

Good! Even though I and most people might not reach the limit every month or any month, restricting and putting caps is a step BACKWARDS. My friend has a home security system that streams HD video to his office, this would be impossible with a 25 Gig limit. People also now BUY (not pirate) movies online. The way forward is to raise the bandwitdth caps or eliminate them and to upgrade the infastructure as needed to support it. To have these caps is like saying, we are going to stop medical reasearch because the cures we currently have are enough to satisfy most people.

Terry
said

For once the consumer wins

Jocelyne
said

Power to the People! :)

Today's Top Stories

Former Liberian President Charles Taylor waits for the start of his sentencing judgement in the courtroom of the Special Court for Sierra Leone in Leidschendam, near The Hague, Netherlands, Wednesday May 30, 2012. (AP / Toussaint Kluiters)

Pick your location

Top Stories -

News Sections

News Programs

Features

Browse: