ConclusionVille
From Konrad Yakabuski, writing in the Globe and Mail last Friday:
There are two main conclusions to be drawn from this week’s Federal Court of Appeal decision rejecting the Competition Bureau’s request to block Rogers Communications’ takeover of Shaw Communications. Neither of them makes Canada look good.The first is that the federal Competition Act is a toothless international embarrassment, wholly incapable of stopping corporate concentration in sectors that are critical to productivity growth in the Canadian economy.The second is that the way this country regulates telecommunications puts way too much emphasis on stability and too little on innovation...
Of course, there is a third conclusion, long ago drawn.
Which is that you and I will pay more.
A whole lot more.
As for improvements in service and innovation driven by competition?
Well...
.
4 comments:
Canada's hopeless competition regime is definitely part of the problem, but the bigger issue is the lack of effective regulation on internet and wireless providers. Telecommunications is a field with high barriers to entry, and competition is limited. Like Canada, most countries have a small number of dominant players, usually around three. In the US, it's Verizon, T-Mobile and AT&T.
Canada, however, stands out as long having some of the world's highest internet and wireless charges. The big three providers justify this by pointing out that Canada is large and sparsely populated, and so, of course, their costs and prices will be higher than in Europe and the US.
But somehow, they always forget to mention Australia, a large and even more sparsely populated country than ours. Despite Australia's greater geographical challenges, that country's average monthly prices for cellphone plans are consistently cheaper than Canada's — up to $37 less a month.
Yeah but, what about Canada's world-leading quality and speed? Well, Australia invested more per capita on telecommunication services between 2005 and 2015, and offers faster network connection speeds. Their market is dominated by one company, Telestra, with TPG a distant second, and a whole bunch small players after that.
All of which, to me, points to a lack of regulation. Like most of our regulators, the CRTC has been captured by the industry it's supposed to oversee. And Canadians continue to pay the price.
the concentration of power within a few corporations is never a good thing, for the consumer or for the security of a country. It doesn't seem to matter what party is in office, the consumer simply is the last in line, well except when it comes to getting money to enhance their profit margin.
It is time that other companies have access to the market if they pass security reviews. The court ought not to have approved this move. Was once a customer of Rogers, then moved to Telus and then Shaw. Now, where do I go?
What these mega companies may find if we have a bad recession, customers will cut their services. A land line is so much less expensive. Being "in touch" 24/7 might be fun for some, but its not necessary.
If we're going to have a competition bureau, then let it do its job.
At this rate it seems its simply a way for governments to look like they're doing something for the consumer when the only winners are the corporations.
Further to Cap, I was in South America a few years back and folks said prices were pretty cheap and as pretty much everyone used a cel, even not well off looking people it must have been true. Not only that people seemed to be getting service way out in the middle of nowhere, far from a city or town. I can’t say I get that every where I go here in Canada.
Hey, this is Canada, government is to keep major corporations, especially monopolies, in profit at the expense of Canadians.
Citizens are mere chattels of government whose existence is to pay taxes to their government overlords.
In Canada their is such things as consumer rights, it is a myth.
Post a Comment