Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLEG 10-22Report to Council Report Number: LEG 10-22 Date: April 25, 2022 From: Paul Bigioni Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor Subject: Intergovernmental Partnership to Improve Digital Infrastructure and Address the Digital Divide - File: A-3700 Recommendation: 1. That the Government of Ontario be requested to: a. Ensure that incremental investments in broadband from other orders of government are made in urban areas and directed to fill gaps in the GTHA; b. Identify Provincially owned fibre assets that can be leveraged to help close the digital divide – such as schools, hospitals and traffic corridors; c. Review existing legislation to include provisions on open access to telecommunications cabling and trenching activities for all developments; 2. That the Government of Canada be requested to: a. Ensure that incremental investments in broadband from other orders of government are made in urban areas and directed to fill gaps in the GTHA; b. Recognize high-speed internet as an essential service, including a definition for affordability that combines fixed and mobile costs as a percentage of household income; c. Collect and share local level data on assets, internet speeds, and service terminations/collection activities, in cooperation with internet service providers (ISPs); d. Request that the Canadian Radio-communications and Telecommunications Commission examine supports for municipal carriers who wish to promote access to their fibre broadband networks for public and private service providers; 3. That this Report be forwarded to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, the Premier of Ontario and the Prime Minister; and 4. That appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the actions necessary to implement the recommendations in this Report. LEG 10-22 April 25, 2022 Subject: Intergovernmental Partnership to Improve Digital Infrastructure and Address the Digital Divide Page 2 Executive Summary: This Report recommends that City Council make requests to the Provincial and Federal governments to improve the City's ability to address the digital divide – the gap between households who have reliable and affordable access to digital technologies and the internet, and those who do not – through improved digital infrastructure, as well as for other orders of government to make policy changes and investments that will improve digital connectivity for residents and businesses. Access to high-speed internet is necessary for residents to equitably participate in the economy and in day-to-day life. Not all residents have sufficient internet service. For example, in Toronto approximately 30% of low-income households struggle with the costs of internet, and half of low-income households with no internet connection cite costs as the primary barrier (Brookfield, 2021). According the CRTC, households in the lowest income quintile spend five times more on telecommunications services than those in the highest income quintile, this represents approximately 9% of annual household income in the lowest tier versus 1.8% in the highest. The inability to access high-speed internet impairs residents' ability to participate in the economy, receive essential services such as education and healthcare, and participate fully in their communities. The pandemic has highlighted gaps, vulnerabilities and the need for adequate internet services to be more accessible and affordable for everyone. Urban and rural communities are both impacted by the digital divide. In urban areas, the challenge is predominantly one of affordability and of lower quality services provided in communities where there are limited market incentives for internet service providers (ISPs) to invest in high capacity, and more costly infrastructure. In rural areas, in addition to affordability challenges, there is often a lack of primary digital infrastructure necessary to connect households to high-speed internet. This is despite significant Federal and Provincial government investments in expanding rural digital infrastructure as well as their policy decisions and modest ongoing programs that lower costs for consumers including low-income households. Targeted investments are needed in broadband across the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area’s (GTHA) urban and rural communities, including incremental investments into urban areas that are not currently benefiting from Provincial and Federal funding for improved digital infrastructure. Municipal, Provincial, and Federal governments have an opportunity to work in partnership with each other and the private sector to bridge the digital divide and better enable residents to participate in the economic and social fabric of the City and of the entire GTHA. Municipalities have a role in achieving this by leveraging municipally-owned fibre in partnership with the broader public and private sectors while ensuring deployment in the right-of-way continues to balance multiple policy objectives. This Report has been prepared jointly by the members of the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area Digital Working Group, which consists of representatives from Regional Municipality of Durham, Regional Municipality of Halton, Regional Municipality of Peel, Regional Municipality of York, City of Brampton, City of Hamilton, City of Mississauga, Town of Oakville, City of Pickering, and City of Toronto. A Report substantially in this form, together with the above Recommendations, is being presented to the Council of each GTHA Digital Working Group LEG 10-22 April 25, 2022 Subject: Intergovernmental Partnership to Improve Digital Infrastructure and Address the Digital Divide Page 3 Member municipality. City of Pickering staff recommend that City Council approve the Recommendations in this Report. Financial Implications: There are no financial implications arising from this Report. Discussion: Digital equality – the equal opportunity for all individuals to benefit from the economic, social, and educational potential of digital technologies and internet connectivity – is a precondition for the health and well-being of our residents, visitors and for cities as a whole. Precarious and unaffordable internet connectivity makes finding employment, obtaining education, and accessing essential services more challenging. It compounds the risk of broader, knock-on costs associated with poverty, including costs absorbed by healthcare, social, and housing services. Digital access and affordability barriers correlate to underlying issues of social equity; with low- income, racialized, and elderly communities having fewer options for reliable broadband access available to them. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted and amplified the consequences of precarious and insufficient access to household internet; with significant costs absorbed by public schools and libraries through their efforts to bridge connectivity gaps in low-income communities. • Families on fixed income, such as Ontario Works or Ontario Disability Support Program, are forced to make difficult decisions between rent, food, and internet. • Low-income households are often forced to choose between fixed or mobile connectivity when faced with combined costs that exceed their ability to pay. • The cost of connectivity is not equitable across the GTHA, with some residents in remote/rural locations forced to use expensive cellular services because wired internet services are poor quality or non-existent. • While internet service providers offer reduced rate programs for low-income households, these services do not support the download and upload speeds required to support working remotely or participation in online schooling. • During lockdown periods, students were directed to online schooling. Families with no internet service found that the only way for their children to participate in online school was to take their van full of kids – even in inclement weather – to the local public library or restaurant and remain in their parked cars and access the Wi-Fi services of these establishments. • The digital divide can create heightened feelings of isolation. Community members can become disengaged with places of worship and community culture centres when they have no means to join virtually. Seniors living in long-term care feel isolated when they cannot have in-person visits with loved ones and have no access to a computer to connect virtually. LEG 10-22 April 25, 2022 Subject: Intergovernmental Partnership to Improve Digital Infrastructure and Address the Digital Divide Page 4 • Community organizations face barriers in delivering services to their clients when the community organization itself cannot access high-speed internet. • GTHA municipalities continue to learn about the issues that our communities and residents face on a daily basis, and these issues will persist beyond the pandemic. Municipal Role Municipalities are well positioned to improve digital equity by leveraging public assets for public good. Although municipalities have traditionally been absent in oversight and public policy surrounding Canada's broadband service market, cities do have a vital role to play in achieving digital equality, and ensuring their communities are well served. Municipalities have an opportunity to adopt a forward-looking policy position that recognizes broadband internet as an essential service, one that must be available regardless of financial means or circumstances. This policy position is not intended as a means of overseeing, competing with, or compromising the activities of incumbent ISPs; these entities are strictly regulated by the Federal government. Adopting the principle that broadband internet is an essential service signals a municipality's intention to leverage its assets and expertise in public service delivery to work within the CRTC's regulatory framework in an effort to enhance local competition, and support digital access for communities in need. Inequality in the availability and affordability of essential services are issues highlighted across a range of existing municipal operations and activities; including in public transportation, education, housing, and public health. Municipal policy and planning activities have recognized the interconnected nature of the services traditionally delivered by municipalities. For example, the public health outcomes associated with lack of affordable housing and transportation inequity. Municipal investment in digital infrastructure and services has the potential to enhance efficiencies in municipal operations and services, facilitate job creation in industries that rely on high-quality broadband, and create a supportive environment for economic growth and prosperity. Municipalities across the GTHA have been working together to build back better. Municipal staff have been having focused discussions and collaboration to determine how the region can best address the digital divide, in partnership with other governments and the private sector. Through this partnership, senior staff of GTHA municipalities have shared their experiences, approaches and rationales for the deployment of fibre broadband infrastructure. They have also shared data and resources to better understand gaps in broadband availability and affordability across the GTHA, as well as reviewed delivery models for Municipal Broadband Network (MBN) deployment. GTHA municipalities have identified key policy, legislative and regulatory changes that could be made by the Provincial and Federal governments to better enable all governments to address the digital divide. Provincial and Federal policy objectives, such as healthcare, education, economic development, and access to justice – are enhanced when more residents and businesses are connected to high-speed internet. LEG 10-22 April 25, 2022 Subject: Intergovernmental Partnership to Improve Digital Infrastructure and Address the Digital Divide Page 5 Invest in the GTHA There is an opportunity for the Provincial and Federal governments to ensure that incremental investments in broadband are made in urban areas and directed to fill gaps in the GTHA. The Provincial and Federal governments have made positive, much needed investments in broadband, including: • a commitment of nearly $4 billion by the Provincial government to achieve universal connectivity across Ontario; • a Joint investment of $362 million to enhanced delivery of high-speed internet in Eastern Ontario; and, • $14.7 million in approved funding for rural and First Nations high-speed internet through Ontario's Improving Connectivity for Ontario (ICON) program. Investments are largely focused on rural communities, which have more limited broadband access compared to urban centres. Residents in urban centres also face a significant barriers to obtaining and maintaining household connectivity. Affordability in urban areas remains problematic, with low-income households (>$30,000 per year) devoting an average of 10% of their incomes to maintaining connectivity (Communications Monitoring Report, 2019; Brookfield Institute, 2021). While governments have implemented programs to provide more affordable internet services to low-income households, these often take the form of discounted service packages with reduced internet speeds. These initiatives have not been sufficient to meaningfully address the affordability challenge faced by many households. Private ISP's have no obligations to maintain these programs over the long-term, posing a risk for low-income households who may come to depend on them. The Federal government’s Connectivity Strategy has set 50/10 Mbps (upload/download) as a minimum speed for Canadians. Many residents in the GTHA receive speeds below this minimum. As shown in Figure 1, residents in significant portions of the GTHA indicate gaps in the availability of 50/10Mbps internet service in urban areas, despite the existence of digital infrastructure in neighbourhoods that have the capacity to provide these internet speeds. The map on the left depicts where 50/10 Mbps internet speeds area available,1 while the map on the right depicts residents' self-reported internet speeds using public diagnostic tools.2 In addition to rural communities that are generally known to lack high-speed internet access, large areas in urban centres also lack adequate connectivity. In August 2021, the Governments of Canada and Ontario announced an investment of $230 million to bring high-speed internet to Central Ontario. The blue dots on the below maps 1 Data was derived from the National Broadband Data - Roads dataset downloaded from the Canadian Government's Open Data Portal (data extract last updated March 2020) 2 Data retrieved from Measurement Lab’s (M-Lab) Network Diagnostic Tool between January and April 2021, which collects speed test data from a variety of common speed test platforms. LEG 10-22 April 25, 2022 Subject: Intergovernmental Partnership to Improve Digital Infrastructure and Address the Digital Divide Page 6 indicate communities benefiting from this funding in the GTHA.3 While many rural communities are receiving needed investments, there is an opportunity to make incremental digital infrastructure investments in urban areas of the GTHA. Figure 1: Internet Speeds across the GTHA There are opportunities to make investments in broadband infrastructure in the GTHA to improve broadband access, quality, and affordability. Broadband funding is most impactful when it is non-discretionary, directed at communities where there is evidence-based and demonstrable need, and where local competition between service providers is enhanced. Many rural areas of the GTHA meet these criteria and Provincial and Federal investments are needed. In addition, in many urban areas it can be cost prohibitive for ISPs to deploy higher capacity fibre infrastructure, especially in neighbourhoods comprised of older multi-dwelling units. In these scenarios, incumbent service providers have few market incentives to upgrade legacy infrastructure where higher cost services are otherwise unaffordable for low-income households. This dilemma is compounded where there are little to no local competitors. Investments from Provincial and Federal governments to subsidize upgrading of legacy 3 Data retrieved from https://news.ontario.ca/en/backgrounder/1000678/ontario-and-canada-bringing-high-speed- internet-to-central-ontario LEG 10-22 April 25, 2022 Subject: Intergovernmental Partnership to Improve Digital Infrastructure and Address the Digital Divide Page 7 infrastructure, and incentivize new ISPs to deploy additional fibre, can improve the affordability of high-speed internet for low-income urban households. Enable municipalities to invest in and use existing fibre more effectively GTHA municipalities own broadband fibre across the GTHA. Municipalities across the GTHA have identified and mapped municipally owned fibre that may be leveraged, to help close the digital divide. The purpose and use of municipally-owned fibre varies across the region. Some municipalities primarily utilize their fibre to support municipal operations, such as transit systems and traffic management systems. Other municipalities have developed delivery models to allow private internet service providers to lease the use of municipally-owned fibre to provide high-speed internet services to residents without incurring the significant costs of deploying "middle mile" fibre infrastructure themselves. These cost savings can then be passed on to the customer. Open access models such as this, where private ISP's provide residential and business services by connecting to municipally owned fibre broadband networks, are examples of public sector investments being leveraged to provide affordable high-speed internet to residents. Municipalities are not taking on the role of an ISP, but rather working within the existing competitive market to enhance competition and lower costs. Identify Provincially owned fibre that can be leveraged to help close the digital divide GTHA municipalities would benefit from the Province identifying Provincially owned fibre assets that can be leveraged to help close the digital divide. Provincially-owed fibre – for example at hospitals, universities, colleges, and regional transit – can be used for to help address the digital divide. By identifying where Provincially-owned fibre exists across the GTHA, municipalities could work with the broader public sector to leverage our collective fibre assets. The Province could play a leadership role by supporting the identification and mapping of this fibre. In turn, the Province could work with municipalities to leverage collectively owned fibre and work in partnership with ISPs to address the digital divide. Collect and share local level data GTHA municipalities would be better positioned to invest in and use municipally-owned fibre more effectively if the Federal government collects and shares local level data on assets, internet speeds, and service terminations/collection activities, in cooperation with internet service providers (ISPs). Internet service disconnections resulting from inability-to-pay are problematic, especially for low-income households with children. Research indicates internet service disconnections can compromise a low-income household's ability to work within already strained household budgets. Cities do not have access to this data from ISPs. This inhibits municipalities' ability to make data-informed decisions on how to most effectively leverage municipal resources and municipally-owned fibre to address the digital divide. Having access into ISPs assets, internet speeds available across the region, and data on service terminations, along with mapping of Provincially owned fibre, would better enable municipalities to make targeted investments and work with service providers more effectively to ensure residents receive adequate internet connectivity. The competitive interests of ISPs – who benefit from significant investments of public capital and resources – can still be maintained with data sharing agreements containing appropriate non-disclosure provisions. LEG 10-22 April 25, 2022 Subject: Intergovernmental Partnership to Improve Digital Infrastructure and Address the Digital Divide Page 8 Enable municipalities to more easily promote access to their fibre The Federal government has an opportunity to enable municipalities to more easily promote access to their fibre for public and private services by requesting the CRTC to define municipal entities as a special class of carrier subject to exemption from sections of the Telecommunications Act, and with specific conditions related to service capacity. The CRTC has the authority under the Telecommunications Act to exempt classes of carriers from obligations under the Act if it deems doing so is in the public interest. Currently, cities can be perceived as having an undue advantage compared to ISPs when using their broadband to provide access to residents. Defining municipal entities as a special class of carrier subject to exemptions under the Telecommunications Act would create more options and flexibility for cities in providing broadband services on their own networks, especially in markets dominated by incumbents. No revisions to the Telecommunications Act are requested, rather, GTHA municipalities request clear guidelines for the CRTC in adjudicating on matters related to municipal carrier entrants to the internet service market (i.e. as facilities based resellers). This could be accomplished through an exemption order made by the CRTC. Non-dominant service providers constitute a fraction of revenues from national telecommunications services. Municipal carrier entrants, operating under strict capacity and revenue conditions, would not enjoy undue advantage nor pose a risk of disrupting competition in their local markets. Ensure that new developments include digital infrastructure GTHA residents would benefit from the Provincial government reviewing legislation to include provisions on open access to telecommunications cabling and trenching activities for all developments. This could be achieved by amending the Planning Act, Section 41 (Site Plan Approval) and Section 51 (Subdivision Approval). Developers currently submit development coordination plans, but there is no requirement for this plan to include details about how a new development will be connected to the internet. Currently, developers may negotiate exclusive access agreements with preferred ISPs, which reduces competition and options available to residents. In the case of multi-unit dwellings, these agreements risk contravening provisions in the Telecommunications Act meant to prevent anti-competitive practices. Amending sections 41 and 51 of the Planning Act to require internet connectivity as a component of development approvals would give municipalities the ability to ensure that all new development includes the digital infrastructure that residents and businesses need to thrive and compete in the digital economy. GTHA municipalities will collaborate with appropriate stakeholders to ensure these changes are implemented effectively. Requiring internet connectivity could take the form of ensuring that all new development have adequate conduits that can be used for fibre optic cable, along with the usual duct bank. This would give municipal planners a role in closing the digital divide by ensuring that all developments have proper connectivity. Well planned developments typically include adequate internet connectivity; however making it a requirement would ensure high-speed internet in all new developments and prevent both anti-competitive practices and the continued use of outdated technology such as co-axial cable connections. New, innovative technology, such as 5G, will LEG 10-22 April 25, 2022 Subject: Intergovernmental Partnership to Improve Digital Infrastructure and Address the Digital Divide Page 9 require extensive hard-wired fibre optic connectivity. This proactive requirement would avoid further risk to already congested public rights-of-way, particularly in the GTHA's downtowns and urban centres – including in designated Urban Growth Centres such as Pickering. Given the essential nature of an internet connection, it is important that connectivity be recognized as an important planning feature, in the same way that we plan for other essential infrastructure such as sewer and water connections. Adding connectivity to the planning approval process will also enable municipalities to help deliver on key Provincial policy objectives including remote delivery of health care services and accelerated access to justice with expansion of remote hearings and digital case management. Recognize broadband as an essential service A firm Federal position is still required to recognize high-speed internet access as an essential service, with a commitment to ensure access regardless of financial means. Such a declaration is most effective coming from the CRTC, as opposed to Provincial or Municipal governments who have little to no regulatory authority in telecommunications. The CRTC has the most impactful legislative and policy tools available to ensure access. In 2016, the CRTC defined broadband as a "basic" service, signaling the Commission's intention that the service should be universally available to households. The CRTC did not, however, exercise its authority to direct network deployments, and has not compelled ISPs to provide broadband to all households. By declaring broadband access as an essential service, it would be given the prominence of other services deemed vital to health, safety and societal functioning, and provide a rationale for direct statutory intervention in its provisioning and pricing. A focused effort on the affordability of high-speed internet is critical to address the digital divide. Across the GTHA, and especially in urban areas, the inability for residents to access adequate connectivity is often a result of unaffordable prices for low-income households. A foundational step in addressing affordability is creating a definition for affordability that combines fixed and mobile costs as a percentage of household income. This should be set by the Federal government. Currently, there is no accepted definition of affordable internet service. Unlike parallel essential utilities and services (e.g., electricity), retail broadband pricing does not benefit from direct regulatory oversight. A definition of affordability would, however, create a critical target for government and private sector partners to aim for. According to the CRTC, fixed and mobile internet costs average 6% for low-income households versus 1.5% for higher-income users. Attachments: 1. Brookfield, 2021: Mapping Toronto's Digital Divide. 2. Communications Monitoring Report, 2019. LEG 10-22 April 25, 2022 Subject: Intergovernmental Partnership to Improve Digital Infrastructure and Address the Digital Divide Page 10 Prepared/Endorsed By: Paul Bigioni Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor PB:ks Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer Original Signed By: Original Signed By: 4/19/22, 3:57 PM Mapping Toronto’s Digital Divide – Brookfield Institute for Innovation + Entrepreneurship https://brookfieldinstitute.ca/mapping-torontos-digital-divide/1/8 Mapping Toronto’s Digital Divide REPORT This report analyzes Toronto's home internet and device access, quality, affordability, and usage, during pandemic closures of businesses, schools, and community organizations. Illustration by: Zaynab Choudhry About the Report The digital divide in Canada is often described as an urban-rural divide. There are acute disparities in access to broadband internet in many parts of rural and remote Canada, and progress has been relatively slow in closing those gaps. In Toronto — Canada’s largest city, Attachment #1 to Report LEG 10-22 brookfield institute for Innovation+ entrepreneurship 4/19/22, 3:57 PM Mapping Toronto’s Digital Divide – Brookfield Institute for Innovation + Entrepreneurship https://brookfieldinstitute.ca/mapping-torontos-digital-divide/2/8 with access to the nation’s fastest internet service— approximately 95% of residents had access to home internet service according to a 2018 Statistics Canada study, an overall access rate equivalent to other urban areas in Ontario, and significantly higher than the 90% access rate outside of metropolitan areas. However, this overall rate can mask critical dimensions of Toronto’s digital divide — who is not connected and why, and whether the internet access of those who are connected is sufficient and affordable. The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunication Commission (CRTC) declared the internet a basic service in 2016, but reliable, affordable, sufficiently fast connectivity, and the devices and literacy needed to use it, is still often plagued by disparities that often map onto other socioeconomic inequalities. In the COVID-19 pandemic, Toronto, like many other jurisdictions around the world, has experienced varying levels of public service and business closures, or capacity and use limits as part of public health responses to the global pandemic. This included schools, public libraries, employment centres, community drop-in spaces, cafes and restaurants where internet and/or computers are available. At the same time, the need for internet and personal devices, such as computers, smartphones or tablets that enable access to the internet, has expanded as work, education, health care, services and social interactions in general have shifted remotely to reduce in-person interactions. Home internet and internet-enabled devices make it possible for many to isolate or quarantine; to reduce their contacts and risk of illness; and to remain connected to family, friends, work, school and services. To get an up-to-date and detailed understanding of the digital divide, or rather a series of divides, a joint Brookfield Institute and team surveyed Toronto residents on their home internet and internet-enabled devices, affordability, speed, quality, usage, and the impacts of not having access at home. Our findings, particularly in the context of the digital shift during the pandemic, reinforce the need to continue scaling programs to close the remaining gaps in internet and device access. They also highlight notable gaps in internet quality and affordability along lines of income, age and race that urgently require greater policy and programmatic response. Read this report to help you: Ryerson Leadership LabRyerson Leadership LabRyerson Leadership LabRyerson Leadership LabRyerson Leadership Lab Understand the demographics and geographies of who is not connected or cannot afford home internet in Toronto, with comparisons to provincial and national data, how they get online, and where in Toronto they live. • Unpack the digital divide beyond basic access: speed, affordability, quality, and devices per household member. • Identify gaps in existing programs and services meant to close the digital divide.• 4/19/22, 3:57 PM Mapping Toronto’s Digital Divide – Brookfield Institute for Innovation + Entrepreneurship https://brookfieldinstitute.ca/mapping-torontos-digital-divide/3/8 Key findings from the report: 98% of Toronto households have home internet access, but 38% of households report download speeds below the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) national target of 50 megabits per second (Mbps). Half of Toronto’s low-income households (52%) and of those aged 60 and older (48%) report download speeds below the national target of 50 Mbps. • 34% of Toronto households are worried about paying their home internet bills over the next few months, with rates of worry greatest among low-income, newcomer, single parent, Latin American, South Asian, Black and Southeast Asian residents. Of the 2% of Toronto households not connected to home internet, half are not connected due to the cost, and 61% say it is impacting their ability to access critical services and information. • Those aged 60 and older have lower rates of access to home internet (95%) and are more likely to lack a device that can connect to the internet, compared to younger residents. • 42% of those in Toronto without home internet access use the public library for access, compared to 16% overall. • Toronto households earning under $50,000 have less than one computer for each person (average of 0.7 computers per person), lower than the national average of 1.0; and 15% of households with less than $20,000 income and 20% of those aged 60 and older do not have a smartphone. • Latest Commentary The Unfinished Business of Budget 2022 Navigating Canada’s scale-up landscape Qualitative Data: Real-time interviews are critical to well-rounded research COMMENTARY COMMENTARY COMMENTARY 4/19/22, 3:57 PM Mapping Toronto’s Digital Divide – Brookfield Institute for Innovation + Entrepreneurship https://brookfieldinstitute.ca/mapping-torontos-digital-divide/4/8 Methodology This research study used a mixed-method approach to explore the digital divide in the City of Toronto. Data were collected through anonymous voluntary surveys online and by phone to 2,500 Toronto residents aged 16 and older in November/December 2020. As previous research indicated that low-income households and older adults were least likely to have internet access and to be underrepresented in online surveys, the telephone survey sample targeted select forward sortation areas that had the highest incidence of low-income households and/or older adults as of the 2016 census. The study used a national survey conducted by the Ryerson Leadership Lab in Spring 2020 to compare the Toronto results and builds on the Brookfield Institute’s past body of work on and the Ryerson Leadership Lab’s work on the responsible governance of technology. Additional data were also collected and analyzed from Statistics Canada, Toronto school boards, the Toronto Public Library and the federal government’s Connecting Families initiative. digital literacydigital literacydigital literacydigital literacydigital literacy Our Partner 4/19/22, 3:57 PM Mapping Toronto’s Digital Divide – Brookfield Institute for Innovation + Entrepreneurship https://brookfieldinstitute.ca/mapping-torontos-digital-divide/5/8 Related Content Our Funder This project was made possible in part by funding from the City of Toronto. In June 2020, the Mayor’s Economic Support and Recovery Task Force identified opportunities to collaboratively undertake research to address urgent COVID-19 needs with Toronto’s eight universities and colleges through the CivicLabTO program. Our Contributors •Zaynab Choudhry, Design Lead, Ryerson Leadership LabZaynab Choudhry, Design Lead, Ryerson Leadership LabZaynab Choudhry, Design Lead, Ryerson Leadership LabZaynab Choudhry, Design Lead, Ryerson Leadership LabZaynab Choudhry, Design Lead, Ryerson Leadership Lab •Braelyn Guppy, Marketing and Communications Lead, Ryerson Leadership LabBraelyn Guppy, Marketing and Communications Lead, Ryerson Leadership LabBraelyn Guppy, Marketing and Communications Lead, Ryerson Leadership LabBraelyn Guppy, Marketing and Communications Lead, Ryerson Leadership LabBraelyn Guppy, Marketing and Communications Lead, Ryerson Leadership Lab •Sarah Doyle, Director of Policy + Research, BII+ESarah Doyle, Director of Policy + Research, BII+ESarah Doyle, Director of Policy + Research, BII+ESarah Doyle, Director of Policy + Research, BII+ESarah Doyle, Director of Policy + Research, BII+E MTORONTO 4/19/22, 3:57 PM Mapping Toronto’s Digital Divide – Brookfield Institute for Innovation + Entrepreneurship https://brookfieldinstitute.ca/mapping-torontos-digital-divide/6/8 Plugging In: Empowering communities to ensure digital literacy access for youth ANNALISE HUYNH + NISA MALLI REPORT I, Human: The digital and soft skills driving Canada’s labour market CREIG LAMB + VIET VU + ROB WILLOUGHBY REPORT Canada’s coding classes prepare kids for the future — but many are left behind NISA MALLI COMMENTARY 4/19/22, 3:57 PM Mapping Toronto’s Digital Divide – Brookfield Institute for Innovation + Entrepreneurship https://brookfieldinstitute.ca/mapping-torontos-digital-divide/7/8 Levelling Up: The quest for digital literacy ANNALISE HUYNH + NISA MALLI REPORT Sam Andrey Selasi Dorkenoo Nisa Malli BII+E Alumni Mohammed ( Joe) Masoodi January 20, 2021 Read Report PDF Print Page   INCLUSIVE GROWTH 4/19/22, 3:57 PM Mapping Toronto’s Digital Divide – Brookfield Institute for Innovation + Entrepreneurship https://brookfieldinstitute.ca/mapping-torontos-digital-divide/8/8 Share  4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 1/52 Home Plans and Reports General Communications Monitoring Report 2019 Communications Monitoring Report 2019 Download PDF (11.77 MB) Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Table of contents Pricing in Canada Communications services in Canadian households:Subscriptions and expenditures 2013-2017 This snapshot provides an overview of the adoption of communications technologies by Canadian households from 2013-2017, and illustrates the trends in household communications expenditure. The data presented here was drawn from Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending and CRTC sources. Additional data on Canada’s communications industry can be found in the Commission’s 2018 Communications Monitoring Report (CMR). On this page i. Quick facts Infographic 1.1 Canadian households’ subscriptions and expenditures quick facts 1 Subscriptions Attachment #2 to Report LEG 10-22 l ♦I Government of Canada ( Table of contents Gouvernement du Canada Canada Communications Monitoring Report 2019 .!. Download PDF (11.77 MB). Pricing in Canada ) Communications services in Canadian households: Subscriptions and expenditures 2013-2017 ------------- On this page i. Quick facts 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 2/52 Expenditures Landline 63% Growth 2016-2017 '1, 5.7% ......-._,,.. • Internet 89% Growth 2016-2017 1' 1.8% Mobile 90% Growth 2016-2017 1' 1.8% Television distribution Growth 2016-2017 '1, 3.3% 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 3/52 Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, Table 11-10-0223-01 Note: “Television distribution” refers to cable, Internet Protocol (IPTV), and satellite services used to provide television services to households. In 2017: Iii $25.25 □ $101.00 D $52.58 Growth 2016-2017 ~8.2% Growth 2016-2017 1' 9.7% Growth 2016-2017 1' 9.4% Growth 2016-2017 ~2.2% 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 4/52 Canadian households continued to abandon landline telephone service in favour of mobile service, with almost a third subscribing to mobile service only. Household subscriptions to television distribution services continued their gradual decline, with about three-quarters of households subscribing, while the percentage of households with Internet service increased slightly to 89.0%. Canadian households spent an average of $233.00 per month on their communications services, an increase of $10.17 (4.6%) from 2016. In comparison, the average annual ination rate in Canada was 1.6% in 2017, according to Statistics Canada. Canadian households spent more per month on mobile ($101.00) than on Internet services ($54.17), television distribution ($52.58) and landline services ($25.25). ii. What communications services do Canadian households use? Infographic 1.2 Communications services of Canadian households 2 3 ii. What communications services do Canadian households use? Almost all households subscribe to landline and/or mobile service Ii and/or D New Brunswick had the lowest percentage of mobile-only households ~□% Quebec had the highest percentage of land line-only households - 99.0% 15.6% 14.1% 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 5/52 19.8% of Canadian households own 3 or more mobile devices Households within the first income quintile allocate 9.1% of their annual income towards communications • services comm . • services 19.8% 9.1% 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 6/52 Source: Landline, mobile, and Internet subscription data from Statistics Canada, custom breakdown of Table 11- 10-0223-01. TV subscription data from CRTC data collection. Landline 63% Internet 89% Mobile 90% Television distribution 72% 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 7/52 Within the Canadian communications system, it is important to highlight individual service subscriptions for landline, mobile, Internet, and television distribution services. Most, if not all, Canadians subscribe to one or more of these services, which play a major role in their everyday lives. This subsection reports Canadian adoption patterns by service type, income, and province. Figure 1.1 Household communications services subscriptions Mobile and landline subscriptions In 2017, slightly more households subscribed to mobile services (89.5%) than Internet services (89.0%). Nearly all Canadian households (99.0%) subscribed to either mobile or landline service in 2017 (Table 1.2), and households owned on average 1.7 mobile phones. Over the last decade, the percentage of households with landlines has decreased, while the percentage with mobile phones has increased (Figure 1.2). Fewer households are subscribing to both services – in 2017, almost a third (36.0%) of Canadian households were mobile-only households, and 9.5% had only a landline. Figure 1.2 Household subscriptions to landline and mobile services (per 100 households) 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Landline Mobile Internet Television distribution 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Pe r c e n t a g e o f h o u s e h o l d s ( % ) View data Source: Landline, mobile, and Internet subscription data from Statistics Canada, custom breakdown of Table 11- 10-0223-01. TV subscription data from CRTC data collection. ► Mobile and landline subscriptions 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 8/52 While the transition to widespread mobile phone use – partly as a substitute for landline service – is a long-term process, the historical data in Table 1.2 shows how rapidly Canadian households have embraced mobile phones. In 2004, landline-only households (40.0%) far exceeded their mobile-only counterparts (2.7%). However, landline and mobile penetration data show opposing trends over the last decade and a half. Take-up of mobile services surpassed that of landline services when landline dropped 5.6% between 2011 and 2012, which was exceptionally fast considering that the annual decline in landline penetration between 2004 and 2017 was 3.2%. By contrast, the number of mobile subscribers increased at the rapid rate of 4.2% between 2011 and 2012, ultimately reversing the penetration trends of both services. In 2017, 36.0% of Canadian households subscribed to mobile services only and 9.5% of households subscribed to landline services only. As mobile and landline service take-up uctuated, revenues reected the change. From 2013 to 2017, mobile revenues increased by 4.9% annually (2018 CMR, Table 6.3) and landline revenues decreased by 5.8% annually (2018 CMR, Table 4.6). During this period, mobile revenue growth outpaced subscriber growth. Mobile data revenues generated much of the growth, as they increased at an average rate of 11.9% each year between 2013 and 2017 (2018 CMR, Figure 6.1). From 2016 to 2017 alone, average data usage per subscriber increased by 37.5% (2018 CMR, Figure 6.15), generating greater revenues per subscriber in addition to the increase in mobile subscriptions. For more insight on consumer spending habits, refer to the Canadian household communications spending section below. Figure 1.3 Mobile and landline adoption rates Landline Mobile 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 View data Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, custom request for a breakdown of Table 11-10-0223- 01 ► 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 9/52 Subscriptions by income quintile Infographic 1.3 Household characteristics and communications expenditures by income quintile Landline 1 Mobile 2 Mobiles 3+ Mobiles 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Pe r c e n t a g e o f h o u s e h o l d s ( % ) View data Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, Table: 11-10-0228-01 ► Subscriptions by income quintile 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 10/52 • $19,852 $Oto 9.1% ($1,806) $32,914 I 1.47 • $44,725 $32,915to 5.2% ($2,304) $56,495 &2.01 • $70,794 $56,496to 4.0% ($2,852) $86,098 &2.53 • $107,287 $86,099to 3.0% ($3,202) $132,808 &2.93 • $208,203 $132,809 1.8% ($3,809) or more &3.39 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 11/52 Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, Table: 11-10-0228-01 The data on telephone subscriptions by income quintile (see Table 1.1) illustrated different consumption patterns in higher- and lower-income households. While 99.0% of Canadian households had telephone service, just 2.4% of Canada’s highest-income households relied solely on a landline, compared to almost 23.9% of the lowest-income households. Forty-two percent of low-income households subscribed to mobile service only, as did about a quarter of the highest- income households. Of the ve income quintiles, households in the fth quintile changed their telephone usage habits the most in 2017. The number of landline-only households in this income quintile decreased by 29.4%. Households in the fourth income quintile changed their telephone usage habits the most when it came to exclusive use of mobile service, showing an increase of 18.3% in 2017. Financial resources appear to play a role in whether households subscribed to both mobile and landline services. Over the past ve years, households in the highest income quintile consistently recorded the lowest percentage of households subscribing to mobile services only. Conversely, households in the lowest income quintile recorded the highest percentage of households subscribing to landline services only. Subscriptions by province Subscriptions by population In 2017, 99.0% of Canadians were covered by long-term evolution (LTE) networks, and with the exception of the North, which had 63.5% coverage, every province had over 90.0% LTE coverage (2018 CMR Table 6.13). Although LTE coverage was largely available in most regions, Alberta led in terms of mobile penetration, with 91.6% of its population subscribing to mobile services (2018 • • Income quintile $ Household income Average members per household Average annual income Communications expenditures as a percentage of annual income (average annual communications expenditures) Subscriptions by province Subscriptions by population 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 12/52 CMR Table 6.15). Prince Edward Island led in terms of coverage. However, it had the lowest penetration rate of the provinces (71.3%), demonstrating that the availability of a network in a certain region doesn’t necessarily translate to a higher penetration rate. Subscriptions by household While a majority of Canadians had access to LTE networks and 89.5% subscribed to mobile services, Quebec and the Atlantic provinces (New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland and Labrador) continued to have more landline service subscribers than Ontario and the Western provinces (Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and British Columbia) (see Table 1.3). Furthermore, there were more mobile-only households in the Western provinces and Ontario than in the Atlantic provinces and Quebec, even though LTE was available to a greater percentage of the population in the Atlantic provinces (2018 CMR Table 6.13). Quebec had the highest percentage of landline-only households (14.1%) and the lowest percentage of households with mobile service (84.4%). Households in New Brunswick were the most reliant upon landlines – 83.4% had landlines and just 11.2% had mobile service only. In contrast, 43.1% of Alberta households relied on mobile service alone, and only 55.6% had landlines. Overall, the coverage of almost 97.0% of Canadians, with two or more networks, gives Canadians some options when making communications services subscription decisions. Internet subscriptions and computer ownership In 2017, 99.0% of Canadian households had access to xed broadband Internet access and 89.0% of Canadian households had a home Internet subscription. Internet use from home increased slightly in all income quintiles except the fourth quintile, an overall average increase of 1.8% (see Table 1.5). The vast majority of high-income households subscribed to Internet services in 2017, compared to less than two-thirds of the lowest-income households. Internet use from home in the rst income quintile was 20.0 percentage points lower than the overall average of 89.0% and 16.3 percentage points lower than in the second income quintile. With mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets, Canadians can access the Internet from nearly any location. However, home computers still played an important role for Canadians. As Table 1.5 shows, most Canadian households had home computers (84.1%). Overall, more households owned mobile phones (89.5%) than home computers (84.1%) in 2017. This trend was more pronounced in the lower income quintiles. For example, 73.1% of Canadian households in the rst income quintile owned mobile phones (see Table 1.3), compared to 63.4% of households that owned home computers (see Table 1.5). Home computer ownership was unchanged between 2016 and 2017, except in the second income quintile, where it increased by 1.4%. iii. What do Canadian households spend on communications services? 4 5 Subscriptions by household Internet subscriptions and computer ownership iii. What do Canadian households spend on communications services?- 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 13/52 Infographic 1.4 Canadian households’ average expenditures on communications services Average monthly household spending on communications $233.00 0,43% Landline 11% ~ Television ':l ~f3% 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 14/52 Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, Table: 11-10-0223-01 Households make decisions about the amounts they are willing to spend on communications services, with spending habits varying for many different reasons. Some habits reect personal choice and others are inuenced by service availability, affordability, and household resources. This section focuses on household spending for various services by income, household location (urban/rural), and age, to inform a better understanding of Canadian households’ communications spending habits. Figure 1.4 Average monthly household communications services spending Canadians' average spending 1 6 ➔ Mobile . services Internet services $101.00 per month $54.17 per month Average annual household income in Canada • $90,185 Spendingon 3 1% communications • O services of income 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 15/52 Data on communications services spending provides insights into how communications services affect the household budget, but there are limitations when using expenditure data to assess adoption and spending patterns. The data does not reect consumption of free services, such as over-the-air television and radio services, which remain valuable to many Canadians. The data presented here reports average expenditures and takes into account all households, including those that do not subscribe to any services. As a result, the average expenditures may over- or under- report actual spending for individual households. Most communications subscriptions, like those for television distribution, landline, and Internet services, tend to be purchased at a household level (and often in a bundle), meaning that there is a single subscription per household. However, larger households may have higher expenditures for these services (e.g. purchasing more Internet data or a broader selection of television channels). Households may have several subscriptions to mobile services. The data presented here does not allow for analysis of individual expenditures on communications services. Statistics Canada reported that average annual household incomes before taxes in Canada in 2016 and 2017 were $91,347 and $90,185 respectively. Average income increased in all income quintiles, except in the fth quintile. In 2017, the Canadian provincial average annual household income before taxes ranged from $76,820 (New Brunswick) to $111,212 (Alberta). The most signicant shift in average household income was in Alberta, which saw a downward shift from $129,102 in 2016 to $111,212 in 2017. Throughout 2017, the average Canadian household spent $233.00 per month on communications services, an increase of $10.17 (4.6%) from 2016 (see Table 1.6). As in 2016, Internet and mobile services drove household expenditure growth and telecommunications industry revenues (see Figure 1.4). In 2017, expenditures on mobile services led in terms of annual growth (9.7%), followed by expenditures on Internet services (9.4%). These increases occurred as consumers shifted to 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Landline Mobile Internet Television Distribution 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 $ View data Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, Table: 11-10-0223-01 6 ► 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 16/52 services offering higher Internet speeds and more mobile data. (See Retail Fixed Internet Sector and Broadband Availability and Retail Mobile Sector in the 2018 CMR for more details on Internet and mobile services respectively.) Expenditures by income quintile Infographic 1.5 Household expenditures on communications services by income quintile Expenditures by income quintile Average income: $19,852 (household income less than $32,914) I $21.50 $258 =1.3% of income 4D ■$53.67 $644 =3.2% of income -■$36.00 $432 =2.2% of income • ■$39.33 =2.4% $472 of income ~T -$150.50 \!I $1,806 =9.1% of income 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 17/52 Average income: $208,203 (household income over $132,809) I $29.08 -$349 m -$154.75 • ■$65.50 (;) ■$68.08 0 $317.42 $1,857 $786 $817 =0.2% of income =0.9% of income =0.4% of income =0.4% of income = 1.8% of income 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 18/52 Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, Table: 11-10-0228-01 See Table 1.6 on Open Data for data of all quintiles In 2017, similar to previous years, household incomes in the fth quintile were approximately 10.5 times higher than those in the rst quintile, while expenditures on communications services as a percentage of household income were about ve times higher in the rst quintile than in the fth. Annual expenditures on communications services represented 9.1% of the average income of households in the rst quintile, compared to only 1.8% of the average income of households in the fth quintile. While there was considerable variance among the average amounts spent by Canadians in each income quintile, households tended to devote a larger proportion of their communications services budget to either mobile or television distribution services. On average, household spending on television distribution services decreased by 2.2% from 2016 to 2017, while average household spending on landline telephone services decreased by 8.2% during the same period. During the same period, household spending on mobile, Internet, and overall communications services continued to grow. Overall, households spent the most on mobile services ($101.00 per month on average; see Figure 1.4). On average, for all income quintiles, spending on landline services declined from 2013 to 2017 at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of ‑8.2%. However, average expenditures on Internet services showed the largest growth (9.4%) between 2016 and 2017, and the highest 2013 to 2017 CAGR (7.4%), for all income quintiles (Table 1.6). Households in the highest income quintiles spent more on communications services than those in the lower income quintiles. Household expenditures increased across all quintiles between 2016 and 2017, with expenditures in households in the rst income quintile increasing the most (7.4%). • Quintile of income Monthly expenditures Annual expenditures 0 Communications expenditures as a percentage of annual income 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 19/52 Even though total spending on communications services by the lowest-income households was more than two times lower than total spending by the highest-income households, as shown in Table 1.7 , expenditures on communications services represented a signicantly larger percentage of their annual incomes, about ve times more to be more precise. In addition, households in the rst income quintile spent more on communications services on a per person basis than all other income quintiles, spending almost $8.75 more per person per month than those in the fth income quintile. Average monthly expenditures by location - urban centres vs. rural communities Infographic 1.6 Average provincial household expenditures on communications services comparison in urban centres and in rural communities 7 8 Average monthly expenditures by location -urban centres -vs. rural communities - Average monthly spending by households in 2017 2013 urban centres $231.27 $211.90 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 20/52 ( / @ High 0 Low G) Alberta Quebec $280.43 $188.65 Total Iii Newfoundland Alberta and Labrador $38.74 $19.74 □ Alberta Quebec $140.43 $73.64 Prince Edward Quebec ~ Island ~ $64.92 $47.81 Newfoundland Quebec and Labrador $66.04 $44.79 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 21/52 Average monthly spending by households in 2017 rural communities $247.58 $210.25 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 22/52 Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, Table 11-10-0223-01 ------i-r----- @ High 0 Low G) Newfoundland Quebec and Labrador Total $277.75 $199.83 Iii Newfoundland Quebec and Labrador $57.25 $30.50 □ Saskatchewan Quebec $119.33 $67.17 ~ British Saskatchewan Columbia ~ $70.42 $44.75 Newfoundland Quebec and Labrador $72.42 $53.00 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 23/52 As seen in Table 1.6, expenditures on mobile and Internet services increased from 2013 to 2017, landline service expenditures decreased, and television distribution service expenditures remained relatively stable (see Figure 1.5). Internet expenditures surpassed landline service expenditures in urban centres in 2013, whereas in rural communities (see Figure 1.6) this occurred in 2015. Further, mobile service expenditures were fairly similar to television distribution service expenditures in rural communities prior to 2013, but more was spent on mobile services in recent years. Figure 1.5 Average monthly household spending on communications services in urban centres Figure 1.6 Average monthly household spending on communications services in rural communities Landline Mobile Internet Television distribution 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 $ View data Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, custom request for a breakdown of Table 11-10-0223- 01 Landline Mobile Internet Television distribution 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 $ View data Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, custom request for a breakdown of Table 11-10-0223- 01 .. I I • I : I ► I r : I : ===== L ► 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 24/52 Households in rural communities increased their spending on all communications services to a greater degree than urban households. On average, households in rural communities spent $247.58 per month, an increase of 8.7% from 2016, compared to those in urban centres, which spent $231.27 per month, an increase of 4.0% for the same period. The difference in average household expenditures between urban and rural communities reects the slightly higher prices offered in rural areas, where there are typically fewer service providers. Expenditures also varied by province. For instance, Quebec residents spent signicantly less on communications services in both urban and rural communities (see Table 1.9 and Table 1.10) than all other provinces, while Newfoundland and Labrador residents spent the most on communications services. Overall, the highest total monthly service spending in urban centres was in Alberta at $280.43 while in rural communities it was in Newfoundland and Labrador, at $277.75. Expenditures by age Infographic 1.7 Household expenditures on communications services by age in 2017 Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending Table: 11-10-0227-01 Data on household spending by age was segmented based on the age of the household’s reference person, the person who typically handled nancial matters in the home. Households whose reference person was aged 40 to 54 spent the most on communications services ($266.08 per 9 Expenditures by age Expenditures on communications services by age of households in2017 Younger (reference person aged 30 or younger) Older (reference person aged 65 or older) $214.67 per month $191.17 per month 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 25/52 month, up 3.2% from 2016), while those whose reference person was aged 65 years or over spent the least ($191.17 per month, up 4.8% from 2016). In all Canadian households, the smallest communications expense was for landline services (Figure 1.7), which were also the services with the biggest age-related differences in household expenditures. Although landline subscriptions are declining annually (as seen in Figure 1.2), landlines remained important for Canada’s older households. While younger households spent just $6.08 per month on average on landline services (an average expenditure that includes many households that do not have a landline), the oldest households spent on average more than six times that amount ($37.83 per month). This difference between age groups was also reected through their usage habits. Older households (whose reference person was aged 65 years or over) spent the most on television distribution services and the least on Internet services. Typically, the younger generation (households whose reference person was under 30 years old), which watched an average of 18.6 hours of television per week, spent on average $24.00 a month on television distribution services. This spending was more than 50% lower than the oldest generation, which watched on average 42.2 hours per week and spent $62.83 per month on television distribution services (2018 CMR - Broadcasting, Figure 9.6). Figure 1.8 is comparable to Figure 1.7, showing how the trends for mobile, Internet, and landline were fairly similar in terms of both expenditures and percentage of users per age group. Figure 1.7 illustrates stark differences in spending between the youngest and oldest households. The youngest households tended to spend much more on Internet and mobile services than their older counterparts. Ninety-seven percent of the youngest generation surveyed used mobile services and allocated a large portion of their spending towards it ($127.92 per month). A similar pattern was visible with Internet services. The correlation between spending and usage suggests that different services have varying levels of importance to each generation, and that individuals spent more on the services they tended to use the most. Figure 1.7 Monthly household expenditures, by service and by age of reference person, 2017 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 26/52 Figure 1.8 Communications services penetration by age group, 2017 iv. Who is covered by broadband and mobile networks across Canada? Infographic 1.8 Broadband and mobile coverage in Canada in 2017 Landline Mobile Internet Television distribution Less than 30 years 30 to 39 years 40 to 54 years 55 to 64 years 65 years and over 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 $/ m o n t h / h o u s e h o l d View data Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, Table: 11-10-0227-01 10 Mobile Internet Television 18 to 34 years 35 to 49 years 50 to 64 years 65 years and over 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 % View data Source: Media Technology Monitor, Fall 2017 (respondents: Canadians aged 18+) ► ► iv. Who is covered by broadband and mobile networks across Canada? 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 27/52 ~ts Mbps Broadband at 1.5 Mbps Canada Rural communities 98.7% 94.0% OLMCs First Nations reserves 98.9% 90.8% 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 28/52 50~~0 Mbps CX) Broadband at 50/10 Mbps, unlimited Canada Rural communities 84.1% 37.2% OLMCs First Nations reserves 88.4% 27.7% 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 29/52 Mobile • Canada Rural communities 99.4% 98.0% OLMCs First Nations reserves 99.5% 88.2% 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 30/52 Source: Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED) and CRTC data collection Notes: For the purposes of this report, the ofcial language minority population is dened in terms of the rst ofcial language spoken metric as dened within the Ofcial Languages Act, using data from the 2016 Census. In all provinces and territories except Quebec, the ofcial language having minority status is French. The presence of ofcial language minority populations within a 25km area of an ofcial minority language school was used to model and map OLMCs. First Nations reserve areas, representing total population and dwellings on reserves, were used in the analysis. Mobile-LTE Canada Rural communities 99.0% 95.9% OLMCs First Nations reserves 99.0% 72.8% 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 31/52 Broadband was measured on a household basis, at 1.5 Mbps and at 50/10 Mbps unlimited service availability. Mobile and mobile via LTE availability were measured on a population basis. Arguably, broadband Internet services and mobile services have become the two most important services to Canadians over the past several years. The two services combined made up more than 66.6% of total household expenditures of communications services at the end of 2017. Hence, access to these services was fundamentally essential to enable Canadians to fully participate in society and to benet from the digital economy. The availability of broadband at 1.5 Mbps and mobile services across Canada varied by province or territory and level of service, especially in certain communities. Generally, Canadians who resided in ofcial minority language communities (OLMCs) and rural communities had similar levels of access to Internet and mobile services to households and Canadians who resided in First Nations reserve areas. In Newfoundland and Labrador, only 67.9% of First Nations reserve areas had access to mobile services, compared to 96.1%, overall, of all residents of Newfoundland and Labrador; this was even lower than in each of the three territories. Two other provinces where the First Nations reserve areas had considerably less access to mobile services than the overall provincial level were Quebec and Manitoba, at 75.6% and 77.6% respectively. Broadband Internet services For the purposes of this section, broadband availability at 1.5 Mbps and at 50/10 Mbps unlimited is reported on a household basis. Availability of 1.5 Mbps broadband in OLMC and rural communities was closely aligned to the provincial average, while availability in First Nations reserve areas in certain provinces was signicantly lower. There were four provinces (Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick) where broadband availability was greater in First Nations reserve areas than the provincial average, which may suggest that these communities were well served in 2017. However, in First Nations reserve areas in the North and in the provinces of Quebec and Ontario, broadband availability was much lower than the provincial gures, suggesting that these communities were less well served overall. The availability of 50/10 Mbps unlimited broadband was noticeably different from availability at 1.5 Mbps. Across Canada, 50/10 Mbps unlimited was available to 84.1% of Canadians. However, only 37.2% of rural communities and 27.7% of First Nations reserve areas had access to the faster speeds of 50/10 Mbps unlimited, demonstrating a divide between the various communities for faster broadband services. In the northern territories (Yukon, Northwest Territories and Nunavut), 50/10 Mbps unlimited broadband is unavailable altogether, which further illustrates the urban- rural divide in terms of access to service, especially at the faster speeds. Figure 1.9 Broadband service availability at 1.5 Mbps in the provinces and territories in 2017 by household, in Canada overall, and in rural communities, OLMCs, and First Nations reserve areas Broadband Internet services 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 32/52 Figure 1.10 Broadband service availability at 50/10 Mbps unlimited in the provinces and territories in 2017 by household, in Canada overall, and in rural communities, OLMCs, and First Nations reserve areas Mobile services Mobile services via LTE were available to 99.0% of Canadians at the end of 2017. In rural communities, OLMCs, and First Nations reserve areas, LTE was available to 95.9%, 99.0%, and 72.8% of the population, respectively. Canada Rural communities OLMCs First Nations reserve areas NL PE NS NB QC ON MB SK AB BC YT NT NU Cana d a 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 % View data Source: Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED) and CRTC data collection Canada Rural communities OLMCs First Nations reserve areas NL PE NS NB QC ON MB SK AB BC YT NT NU Cana d a 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 % View data Source: Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED) and CRTC data collection ► I ► Mobile services 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 33/52 The largest difference in coverage between the provincial average and the First Nations reserve areas was seen in Manitoba. Only 19.5% of the First Nations reserve areas in Manitoba had access to LTE, compared to 93.4% of Manitobans in general. Two other provinces that also showed noticeable differences in access to LTE were Newfoundland and Labrador and Ontario where 67.9% and 62.3% of the First Nations reserve areas are covered by LTE, respectively, compared to their overall provincial gures of 94.7% and 99.7% respectively. Figure 1.11 Mobile service availability by province and territory in 2017, by population in Canada overall, in rural communities, in OLMCs, and in First Nations reserve areas Figure 1.12 Mobile service availability (LTE) by province and territory in 2017, by population in Canada overall and in rural communities, OLMCs, and First Nations reserve areas Canada Rural communities OLMCs First Nations reserve areas NL PE NS NB QC ON MB SK AB BC YT NT NU Cana d a 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 % View data Source: Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED) and CRTC data collection Canada Rural communities OLMCs First Nations reserve areas NL PE NS NB QC ON MB SK AB BC YT NT NU Cana d a 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 % View data Source: Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED) and CRTC data collection ► ► 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 34/52 New Brunswick has the largest ofcial language minority population, at 31.0% of its overall population, followed by Quebec at 13.4%. See Table 1.11 (Open data) for 2016 data on Canadians whose mother tongue is an ofcial language with minority status in the province or territory in which they reside, and in Canada overall. In all provinces and territories except Quebec, the ofcial language having minority status is French. Map 1.1 Population distribution of OLMCs across Canada, 2016  MapInfo  KML Source: 2016 Census, Statistics Canada, and data collection from both Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED) and CRTC Map 1.1 displays areas across Canada where OLMCs are present. The blue circles are OLMCs, modeled as areas within 25km of an ofcial language minority school. The interactive map for OLMCs is also available online. Map 1.2 displays areas across Canada where First Nations reserve areas are present. The colour and number inside each circle represents the specic type of reserve where First Nations reserve areas are present and the number of reserves in each area. Broadband availability within each census subdivision is available as part of the data set. Zoom into the map to update the tooltip with the broadband availability or review the Data Panel at the bottom of the map for full details. The interactive map for the number of reserve areas is also available online. Map 1.2 Distribution of First Nations reserve areas across Canada, 2017 \'"'-- i c:--1 NWT ~J i ..... _,_ Mo.......,: IA Mo<I,_, (Mw•~ ,_.._. Qo,M~-,,.~ V --· •.. • • • • • • • •• • • • •...__,,....,... • • • • • • . - .. NC • ... • 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 35/52  MapInfo  KML Source: 2016 Census, Statistics Canada, and data collection from both Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED) and CRTC v. Methodology Urban centres and rural communities Urban centres, also known as small/medium/large population centres, are dened as follows: small centres have populations between 1,000 and 29,999, medium centres have populations between 30,000 and 99,999, and large centres have populations greater than 100,000. For the purposes of this report, data for urban centres reports the average of small/medium/large centres. Rural communities are dened as areas with a population of less than 1,000 or a density of 400 or fewer people per square kilometre. Ocial language minority communities To identify ofcial language minority communities (OLMCs) in Canada, a number of different criteria can be used. These include identifying the rst language learned at home, the language spoken at home, and the language of education. For the purposes of this report, the ofcial language minority population is dened in terms of the rst ofcial language spoken metric as dened within the Ofcial Languages Act, using data from the 2016 Census. In all provinces and territories except Quebec, the ofcial language having minority status is French. The presence of ofcial language minority populations within a 25km area of an ofcial minority language school was used to model and map OLMCs. ' --- ", 8 IC <, .-• "" " ' v. Methodology II "I Y 3,.-s- ,, • ~ 13 13 Tf>ol. I, 10 ,..,.,,_ I l<P•"'wt f Ml i.-,.... "'""--- Urban centres and rural communities Official language minority communities -· ([ lob r ·- '" 'o.., 2) ,.~ °" 13 N~""4,, .,.; .. 4 .,It,.. • II ~• Ml 16o; I, ............ \, 1"'10., Ottt-,1,.oc(, vr .<1 1; 'i-;_ ...... -0 fi:.'t: -,. Ill ·-N-lOII. -----~ 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 36/52 As a means of mapping OLMCs and calculating the availability of 50/10 Mbps unlimited service, a method of OLMC population placement was chosen that concentrates on areas within 25 km of ofcial language minority schools to represent the locations of the communities. This methodology, which was developed by Canadian Heritage, was used to assign OLMC populations to areas and to calculate 50/10 Mbps unlimited availability to OLMC communities. First Nations reserve areas Statistics Canada uses census subdivisions to represent different areas in Canada. Census subdivisions are municipalities or areas that can be equated to municipalities for statistical reasons. The different census subdivisions used by Statistics Canada were assessed. The census subdivisions that represent First Nations reserve areas were included in the data analysis as well as mapping of this population. The analysis was based upon total population and dwellings on reserves according to the Statistics Canada census data and, as such, it may differ from other ofcial sources. Income quintiles and household spending Income quintile information regarding household expenditures on communications services comes from Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending and does not include any projections or CRTC data. Canadian household incomes and household monthly expenditures were reported for the ve income quintiles. An income quintile is a measure of the socioeconomic status of 5 different household groups (specically household income levels), with each household group representing about 20% of the total population. Table 1.1 Average annual household incomes and average monthly expenditures by income quintile ($/month), 2017 Type First quintile Second quintile Third quintile Fourth quintile Fifth quintile Income Less than $32,914 Between $32,915 to $56,495 Between $56,496 to $86,098 Between $86,099 to $132,808 Over $132,809 Average annual income $19,852 $44,725 $70,794 $107,287 $208,203 Landline $21.50 $25.17 $23.58 $26.67 $29.08 Mobile $53.67 $71.67 $103.08 $121.67 $154.75 Internet $36.00 $49.33 $58.00 $61.92 $65.50 First Nations reserve areas Income quintiles and household spending Table 1.1 Average annual household incomes and average monthly expenditures by income quintile ($/month), 2017 Type Income !Average annual income Landline Mobile Internet First quintile Second Third quintile Fourth quintile Fifth quintile quintile 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 37/52 Type First quintile Second quintile Third quintile Fourth quintile Fifth quintile TV distribution $39.33 $45.83 $53.00 $56.58 $68.08 Total $150.50 $192.00 $237.67 $266.83 $317.42 Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, Table: 11-10-0223-01 vi. Appendices Table 1.2 Canadian landline and mobile service subscribers per 100 households, 2004- 2017 Year Landline Mobile Landline and/or mobile Landline only Mobile only 2004 96.2 58.9 98.9 40.0 2.7 2005 94.0 62.9 98.8 36.0 4.8 2006 93.6 66.8 98.6 31.8 5.0 2007 92.5 71.9 98.8 26.9 6.3 2008 91.1 74.3 99.1 24.8 8.0 2009 89.3 77.2 99.3 22.1 10.0 2010 89.3 78.1 99.4 21.3 10.1 2011 86.6 79.1 99.3 20.2 12.7 2012 83.8 81.3 99.2 17.9 15.4 2013 79.1 84.7 99.3 14.6 20.2 2014 75.5 85.6 99.2 13.6 23.7 2015 71.9 86.1 99.3 13.2 27.5 2016 66.8 87.9 99.3 11.4 32.5 2017 63.0 89.5 99.0 9.5 36.0 Source: Statistics Canada’s Affordability Study (2004-2007) and Survey of Household Spending, custom request for a breakdown of Table 11-10-0223-01 (2008-2017) Type First quintile Second Third quintile Fourth quintile Fifth quintile quintile t TV I I distribution Total $150.50 $192.00 $237.67 $266.83 $317.42 vi. Appendices Table 1.2 Canadian land line and mobile service subscribers per 100 households, 2004- 2017 Year 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Landline r Mobile Landline r and/or Land line only Mobile only mobile 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 38/52 Table 1.3 Canadian landline and mobile service subscribers per 100 households, by income quintile, 2013-2017 Service Year First quintile Second quintile Third quintile Fourth quintile Fifth quintile Average of all quintiles CAGR of average of all quintiles (2013-2017) Landline 2013 65.2 75.0 82.2 84.7 87.5 78.9 -5.5% 2014 65.3 69.1 74.3 80.2 88.3 75.5 2015 63.6 68.6 72.1 74.1 81.0 71.9 2016 58.2 65.3 63.6 70.6 76.1 66.8 2017 54.9 59.7 62.7 65.2 72.5 63.0 Growth 2016- 2017 (%) -5.7 -8.6 -1.4 -7.6 -4.7 -5.6 Mobile 2013 66.8 79.7 88.5 92.9 96.4 84.9 1.3% 2014 67.4 83.2 89.4 93.2 95.0 85.6 2015 69.9 80.3 89.9 93.9 96.7 86.1 2016 68.7 85.6 92.7 96.2 96.4 87.9 2017 73.1 86.8 94.4 96.3 96.9 89.5 Growth 2016- 2017 (%) 6.4 1.4 1.8 0.1 0.5 1.8 Landline and/or mobile 2013 97.5 99.7 99.7 99.6 100.0 99.3 -0.1% 2014 97.8 99.4 99.2 99.5 99.8 99.2 2015 98.6 99.0 99.5 99.8 99.8 99.3 2016 98.2 99.5 99.6 99.6 99.8 99.3 2017 97.0 99.6 99.5 99.5 99.3 99.0 Growth 2016- 2017 (%) -1.2 0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.5 -0.3 Table 1.3 Canadian land line and mobile service subscribers per 100 households, by income quintile, 2013-2017 l Service Year First Second Third Fourth Fifth quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile quintiles (2013-2017) Average CAGR of average of all of all quintiles Landline Mobile Landline and/or mobile 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 39/52 Service Year First quintile Second quintile Third quintile Fourth quintile Fifth quintile Average of all quintiles CAGR of average of all quintiles (2013-2017) Landline only 2013 30.7 20.0 11.2 6.7 3.6 14.4 -9.9% 2014 30.4 16.2 9.8 6.3 4.8 13.6 2015 28.7 18.7 9.6 5.9 3.1 13.2 2016 29.5 13.9 6.9 3.4 3.4 11.4 2017 23.9 12.8 5.1 3.2 2.4 9.5 Growth 2016- 2017 (%) -19.0 -7.9 -26.1 -5.9 -29.4 -16.8 Mobile only 2013 32.3 24.7 17.5 14.9 12.5 20.4 15.3% 2014 32.5 30.3 24.9 19.3 11.5 23.7 2015 35.0 30.4 27.4 25.7 18.8 27.5 2016 40.0 34.2 36.0 29.0 23.7 32.6 2017 42.1 39.9 36.8 34.3 26.8 36.0 Growth 2016- 2017 (%) 5.2 16.7 2.2 18.3 13.1 10.5 Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, custom request for a breakdown of Table 11-10-0223- 01. Each quintile represents 20% of households. Table 1.4 Landline and mobile service subscribers per 100 households, by province, 2017 Province Landline Mobile Landline and/or mobile Landline only Mobile only British Columbia 59.3 92.0 98.7 6.7 39.4 Alberta 55.6 93.6 98.7 5.1 43.1 Saskatchewan 57.3 93.5 99.7 6.2 42.4 r Service quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile quintiles (2013-2017) I Year First Second Third Fourth Fifth Average CAGR of average of all of all quintiles Landline only Mobile only Table 1.4 Landline and mobile service subscribers per 100 households, by province, 2017 Province British Columbi Alberta Saskatchewan a Landline Landline Mobile and/or Land line only Mobile only b'I mo 1e 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 40/52 Province Landline Mobile Landline and/or mobile Landline only Mobile only Manitoba 65.6 90.1 99.5 9.4 33.9 Ontario 61.2 90.8 99.3 8.5 38.1 Quebec 67.6 84.4 98.5 14.1 30.9 New Brunswick 83.4 87.8 99.0 11.2 15.6 Nova Scotia 68.2 87.1 98.9 11.8 30.7 Prince Edward Island 67.8 87.3 98.6 11.3 30.8 Newfoundland and Labrador 83.0 89.1 99.6 10.5 16.6 All of Canada 63.0 89.5 99.0 9.5 36.0 Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, custom request for a breakdown of Table 11-10-0223- 01 Table 1.5 Home computer ownership and Internet use from home per 100 households, by income quintile, 2013-2017 Technology Year Household income less than $32,914 (rst quintile) Household income from $32,915 to $56,495 (second quintile) Household income from $56,496 to $86,098 (third quintile) Household income from $86,099 to $132,808 (fourth quintile) Household income over $132,809 (fth quintile) Average for all quintiles Home computer 2013 64.4 80.6 89.8 95.4 97.9 85.6 2014 64.3 78.1 87.7 94.0 97.4 84.3 2015 61.9 79.6 89.1 95.3 96.6 84.5 2016 63.9 78.0 89.1 93.4 96.2 84.1 2017 63.4 79.1 89.5 93.5 95.1 84.1 Growth 2016- 2017 (%) -0.8 1.4 0.4 0.1 -1.1 0 Internet 2013 59.7 77.6 89.0 94.9 98.4 83.9 Province ick Manitoba Ontario Quebec NewBrunsw Nova Scotia Prince Edwa Newfound la All of Canad rd Island nd and Labrador a I I Landline I I 63.0 Landline Mobile and/or Land line only Mobile only mobile I 89.5 99.0 9.5 36.0 - Table 1.5 Home computer ownership and Internet use from home per 100 households, by income quintile, 2013-2017 Technology Year Home computer Internet . Household income less than $32,914 (fi rst quintile) Household Household Household income from $32,915to $56,495 (second quintile) income from $56,496to $86,098 (third quintile) income from $86,099to $132,808 (fourth quintile) r Household income Average over $132,809 for all (fifth quintiles quintile) I 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 41/52 Technology Year Household income less than $32,914 (rst quintile) Household income from $32,915 to $56,495 (second quintile) Household income from $56,496 to $86,098 (third quintile) Household income from $86,099 to $132,808 (fourth quintile) Household income over $132,809 (fth quintile) Average for all quintiles use from home 2014 63.5 78.5 88.7 95.5 98.3 84.9 2015 64.4 82.1 92.8 97.2 98.2 86.9 2016 65.2 82.7 93.3 97.9 98.1 87.4 2017 69.0 85.3 94.1 97.7 98.5 89.0 Growth 2016- 2017 (%) 5.8 3.1 0.9 -0.2 0.4 1.8 Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, custom request for a breakdown of Table 11-10-0223- 01 Table 1.6 Average ve-year monthly household spending on communications services, by service and by income quintile ($/month/household), 2013-2017 Service Year First quintile Second quintile Third quintile Fourth quintile Fifth quintile Average of all quintiles CAGR of average of all quintiles (2013-2017) Landline 2013 29.08 33.50 36.08 38.17 41.00 35.58 -8.2% 2014 26.58 31.08 32.50 36.17 40.33 33.33 2015 25.50 28.08 29.83 31.50 36.08 30.17 2016 22.75 26.67 27.75 26.92 33.25 27.50 2017 21.50 25.17 23.58 26.67 29.08 25.25 Growth 2016- 2017 (%) -5.5 -5.6 -15.0 -0.9 -12.5 -8.2 Mobile 2013 42.42 55.92 77.25 91.75 127.00 78.92 6.4% 2014 43.92 60.42 80.83 100.42 127.83 82.67 use from home Technology Year Household income less than $32,914 ( first quintile) Household Household Household income from $32,915to $56,495 (second quintile) income from $56,496to $86,098 (third quintile) income from $86,099to $132,808 (fourth quintile) Household income 1 Average over $132,809 for all ( quintiles fifth quintile) I Table 1.6 Average five-year monthly household spending on communications services, by service and by income quintile ($/month/household), 2013-2017 I Service Year F·itth I Average CAGR of average First Second Third Fourth • •1 • •1 • •1 • •1 • •1 of all of all quintiles qumt1 e qumt1 e qumt1 e qumt1 e qumt1 e quintiles (2013-2017) Landline Mobile 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 42/52 Service Year First quintile Second quintile Third quintile Fourth quintile Fifth quintile Average of all quintiles CAGR of average of all quintiles (2013-2017) 2015 43.75 62.25 84.83 105.33 140.08 87.25 2016 47.42 66.08 95.42 110.67 141.00 92.08 2017 53.67 71.67 103.08 121.67 154.75 101.00 Growth 2016- 2017 (%) 13.2 8.5 8.0 9.9 9.8 9.7 Internet 2013 25.58 35.25 42.08 48.00 52.42 40.67 7.4% 2014 29.50 37.17 44.17 48.75 52.67 42.42 2015 30.58 41.58 49.92 53.75 56.83 46.50 2016 32.17 43.58 52.00 58.00 61.92 49.50 2017 36.00 49.33 58.00 61.92 65.50 54.17 Growth 2016- 2017 (%) 11.9 13.2 11.5 6.8 5.8 9.4 Television distribution 2013 37.00 49.33 57.67 64.58 74.50 56.58 -1.8% 2014 38.92 49.42 56.92 62.25 74.17 56.33 2015 38.83 46.92 55.42 58.75 72.42 54.50 2016 37.75 47.92 52.50 59.58 71.08 53.75 2017 39.33 45.83 53.00 56.58 68.08 52.58 Growth 2016- 2017 (%) 4.2 -4.4 1.0 -5.0 -4.2 -2.2 Total 2013 134.08 174.00 213.08 242.50 294.92 211.75 2.4% 2014 138.92 178.08 214.42 247.58 295.00 214.75 2015 138.67 178.83 220.00 249.33 305.42 218.42 2016 140.09 184.25 227.67 255.17 307.25 222.83 Service Internet Television distributio Total n Year First Second Third Fourth Fifth Average quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile of all quintiles CAGR of average of all quintiles (2013-2017) 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 43/52 Service Year First quintile Second quintile Third quintile Fourth quintile Fifth quintile Average of all quintiles CAGR of average of all quintiles (2013-2017) 2017 150.50 192.00 237.67 266.83 317.42 233.00 Growth 2016- 2017 (%) 7.4 4.2 4.4 4.6 3.3 4.6 CAGR of total services 2013- 2017 2.9 2.5 2.8 2.4 1.9 2.4 - Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, Table: 11-10-0223-01 Table 1.7 Expenditure per service and by income quintile as a percentage of average annual income, 2017 Metric First quintile Second quintile Third quintile Fourth quintile Fifth quintile Average of all quintiles Average income $19,852 $44,725 $70,794 $107,287 $208,203 $90,185 Landline 1.3%0.7%0.4%0.3%0.2%0.3% Mobile 3.2%1.9%1.8%1.4%0.9%1.3% Internet 2.2%1.6%1.0%0.6%0.4%0.7% Television distribution 2.4%1.4%0.9%0.6%0.4%0.7% Total communications expenditures 9.1%5.2%4.0%3.0%1.8%3.1% Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, Table: 11-10-0223-01 Table 1.8 Household spending on communications services as a percentage of annual income, by income quintile, 2013-2017 Year Characteristics First quintile Second quintile Third quintile Fourth quintile Fifth quintile All quintiles 2013 Minimum household income threshold $0 $30,669 $51,805 $79,723 $121,292 Less than $30,668 Service CAGRof total services Year 2013- 2017 I First Second Third Fourth Fifth quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile I 2.9 2.5 2.8 2.4 1.9 I I I Average CAGR of average of all of all quintiles quintiles (2013-2017) 2.4 I Table 1.7 Expenditure per service and by income quintile as a percentage of average annual income, 2017 Metric ome Average inc Landline Mobile -- istribution I Internet Television d Total comm expenditure unications s First Second quintile quintile 9.1% 5.2% Third Fourth Fifth Average of all quintile quintile quintile quintiles - 4.0% 3.0% 1.8% 3.1% Table 1.8 Household spending on communications services as a percentage of annual income, by income quintile, 2013-2017 T Year Characteristics First Second Third Fourth Fifth All quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile quintiles 2013 I l l l 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 44/52 Year Characteristics First quintile Second quintile Third quintile Fourth quintile Fifth quintile All quintiles Maximum household income threshold $30,668 $51,804 $79,722 $121,291 n/a More than $121,292 Average annual income $18,582 $41,105 $64,854 $98,634 $199,702 $84,575 Average members per household 1.49 2.11 2.49 2.95 3.34 2.48 Communications expenditures as a percentage of average annual income 8.3%4.9%3.8%2.8%1.7%2.9% 2014 Minimum household income threshold $0 $30,520 $53,275 $81,295 $124,839 Less than $30,519 Maximum household income threshold $30,519 $53,274 $81,294 $124,838 n/a More than $124,839 Average annual income $19,664 $42,122 $67,083 $101,177 $201,752 $86,360 Average members per household 1.50 2.05 2.51 2.91 3.40 2.47 Communications expenditures as a percentage of average annual income 8.5%4.1%3.8%2.9%1.8%3.0% 2015 Minimum household income threshold $0 $31,609 $54,588 $82,710 $126,879 Less than $31,608 Maximum household income threshold $31,608 $54,587 $82,709 $126,878 n/a More than $126,879 Average annual income $19,403 $42,887 $68,331 $103,021 $210,693 $88,867 Average members per household 1.43 2.11 2.57 2.91 3.35 2.47 -- --I First Second Third Fourth Fifth All Year Characteristics quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile quintiles 2014 2015 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 45/52 Year Characteristics First quintile Second quintile Third quintile Fourth quintile Fifth quintile All quintiles Communications expenditures as a percentage of average annual income 8.6%5.0%3.9%2.9%1.7%2.9% 2016 Minimum household income threshold $0 $32,091 $55,471 $85,337 $130,046 Less than $32,090 Maximum household income threshold $32,090 $55,470 $85,336 $130,045 n/a More than $130,046 Average annual income $19,559 $43,436 $70,178 $104,533 $219,031 $91,347 Average members per household 1.47 2.01 2.51 3.00 3.36 2.47 Communications expenditures as a percentage of average annual income 8.6%5.1%3.9%2.9%1.7%2.9% 2017 Minimum household income threshold $0 $32,915 $56,496 $86,099 $132,809 Less than $32,914 Maximum household income threshold $32,914 $56,495 $86,098 $132,808 n/a More than $132,808 Average annual income $19,852 $44,725 $70,794 $107,287 $208,203 $90,185 Average members per household 1.47 2.01 2.53 2.93 3.39 2.47 Communications expenditures as a percentage of average annual income 9.1%5.2%4.0%3.0%1.8%3.1% Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, Table: 11-10-0223-01 Table 1.9 Household average monthly household communications services expenditure in rural communities, 2012-2017 Region Service 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 -- -- First Second Third Fourth Fifth All Year Characteristics quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile quintiles 2016 2017 . . Table 1.9 Household average monthly household communications services expenditure in rural communities, 2012-2017 I Region Service 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 J 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 46/52 Region Service 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Can.Landline 47.25 47.42 42.83 42.00 41.08 36.92 Can.Mobile 58.17 63.08 76.17 77.00 77.67 94.17 Can.Internet 34.00 37.42 39.25 43.75 46.17 54.83 Can.Television distribution 59.25 62.33 62.75 63.17 62.92 61.67 N.L.Landline 58.33 58.50 56.17 55.83 53.08 57.25 N.L.Mobile 60.67 62.33 76.92 87.92 93.67 95.67 N.L.Internet 31.75 37.83 37.42 45.33 49.33 52.42 N.L.Television distribution 61.92 65.33 70.25 70.75 76.67 72.42 P.E.I.Landline 51.83 56.00 52.58 46.42 46.33 47.50 P.E.I.Mobile 55.25 51.08 89.58 89.75 92.92 94.33 P.E.I.Internet 35.50 40.50 39.67 50.42 58.83 59.08 P.E.I.Television distribution 60.83 73.08 62.00 58.92 70.83 63.58 N.S.Landline 55.42 54.67 53.17 54.08 44.58 44.42 N.S.Mobile 58.50 67.42 67.67 66.08 84.33 86.00 N.S.Internet 35.83 38.17 42.75 45.92 52.92 57.00 N.S.Television distribution 67.92 65.92 65.50 66.25 61.92 63.58 N.B.Landline 50.17 47.58 47.00 45.75 44.42 43.83 N.B.Mobile 53.67 58.67 73.42 66.50 63.33 86.08 N.B.Internet 31.75 33.83 38.58 39.25 41.08 51.08 N.B.Television distribution 60.17 59.42 57.75 65.33 64.83 59.42 Que.Landline 43.50 41.83 38.25 38.00 37.08 30.50 Que.Mobile 31.17 45.25 49.42 49.50 53.42 67.17 Que.Internet 31.83 33.00 33.67 37.08 36.42 49.17 Que.Television distribution 51.75 55.75 50.67 50.83 54.08 53.00 Ont.Landline 46.33 45.33 41.92 43.83 44.33 38.42 Ont.Mobile 50.75 55.33 80.50 78.25 70.50 108.42 Ont.Internet 36.83 43.00 44.42 47.42 54.92 57.50 Regio Can. Can. Can. Can. N.L. N.L. N.L. N.L. P.E.I. P.E.I. P.E.I. P.E.I. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.B. N.B. N.B. N.B. Que. Que. Que. Que. Ont. Ont. Ont. n Service 2012 2013 -- 2014 2015 2016 2017 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 47/52 Region Service 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Ont.Television distribution 57.67 65.83 69.17 66.83 61.92 69.92 Man.Landline 46.83 49.25 46.33 43.33 40.50 40.08 Man.Mobile 70.42 83.83 91.42 104.17 103.50 111.50 Man.Internet 29.58 37.83 42.33 38.00 52.92 57.83 Man.Television distribution 55.75 58.83 55.67 70.33 77.83 65.50 Sask.Landline 54.92 52.83 51.17 48.33 47.67 39.00 Sask.Mobile 68.75 88.25 98.83 109.17 116.00 119.33 Sask.Internet 34.08 29.25 37.92 41.42 44.75 44.75 Sask.Television distribution 67.75 64.58 74.75 70.50 73.75 70.42 Alta.Landline 46.25 56.92 39.58 36.25 36.17 35.00 Alta.Mobile 130.17 114.67 139.67 118.75 121.17 117.75 Alta.Internet 41.33 42.42 42.17 52.58 46.08 56.33 Alta.Television distribution 76.17 72.75 80.08 74.42 70.42 66.58 B.C.Landline 47.08 43.25 39.83 30.42 34.00 31.42 B.C.Mobile 63.08 48.92 53.25 94.92 88.92 98.17 B.C.Internet 31.17 38.33 37.83 54.17 52.92 70.42 B.C.Television distribution 55.92 59.75 59.00 68.92 64.58 51.67 Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, custom request for a breakdown of Table 11-10-0223- 01 Table 1.10 Household average monthly communications services expenditure in urban centres, 2012-2017 Region Service 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Can.Landline 35.97 34.06 32.06 28.89 25.95 23.89 Can.Mobile 70.94 80.88 83.58 88.40 93.76 101.77 Can.Internet 36.83 41.06 42.91 46.82 49.91 54.09 Can.Television distribution 56.25 55.90 55.47 53.55 52.72 51.52 N.L.Landline 47.14 43.48 42.76 40.66 42.19 38.74 Region Ont. Man. Man. Man. Man. Sask. Sask. Sask Sask lAlta. Alta. Alta. Alta. B.C. B.C. B.C. B.C. Service 2012 2013 . -- 2014 2015 2016 2017 Table 1.10 Household average monthly communications services expenditure in urban Regio Can. Can. Can. Can. N.L. n Service centres, 2012-2017 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 48/52 Region Service 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 N.L.Mobile 77.17 84.21 92.92 99.46 112.16 117.77 N.L.Internet 38.28 42.42 42.88 47.00 48.92 54.34 N.L.Television distribution 62.32 61.44 67.91 61.87 64.05 66.04 P.E.I.Landline 40.98 42.66 43.50 42.42 37.39 34.58 P.E.I.Mobile 62.79 70.99 71.25 83.65 84.03 96.50 P.E.I.Internet 38.76 43.89 45.67 50.40 55.09 64.92 P.E.I.Television distribution 57.86 58.07 63.75 58.84 61.33 52.92 N.S.Landline 44.13 40.77 38.93 36.88 36.91 34.11 N.S.Mobile 70.56 77.16 72.22 85.00 95.31 95.80 N.S.Internet 38.59 43.92 45.06 49.52 54.67 57.84 N.S.Television distribution 62.40 58.52 61.36 55.48 58.14 56.09 N.B.Landline 40.88 40.08 36.31 35.93 36.28 34.50 N.B.Mobile 64.05 65.84 69.18 78.76 83.96 85.73 N.B.Internet 38.31 41.14 41.38 46.55 46.51 51.52 N.B.Television distribution 57.62 58.08 59.72 55.93 57.10 58.34 Que.Landline 33.20 31.17 32.52 27.47 26.09 22.41 Que.Mobile 49.77 53.31 57.14 58.48 65.12 73.64 Que.Internet 35.26 37.97 35.89 37.61 41.36 47.81 Que.Television distribution 44.64 44.56 46.33 45.91 46.87 44.79 Ont.Landline 38.61 37.95 33.15 31.23 27.51 25.98 Ont.Mobile 73.17 86.79 88.82 92.76 97.80 103.93 Ont.Internet 38.92 43.44 47.25 50.85 53.18 55.66 Ont.Television distribution 59.47 58.24 55.45 53.08 51.64 51.66 Man.Landline 35.35 34.03 34.29 30.85 25.66 26.20 Man.Mobile 71.86 84.86 83.55 84.79 88.48 104.33 Man.Internet 36.41 37.91 41.90 43.79 46.38 51.32 Man.Television distribution 61.03 60.79 60.79 58.55 53.72 52.04 Regio N.L. N.L. N.L. I P.E.I. P.E.I. P.E.I. P.E.I. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.B. N.B. N.B. N.B. Que. Que. Que. Que. Ont. Ont. Ont. Ont. Man. Man. Man. Man. - n Service - 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 49/52 Region Service 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Sask.Landline 38.29 35.05 31.33 28.98 27.11 24.17 Sask.Mobile 86.50 92.71 95.85 106.26 111.11 118.16 Sask.Internet 32.80 34.41 37.10 43.22 44.46 50.05 Sask.Television distribution 62.65 63.83 63.53 63.61 61.21 57.76 Alta.Landline 34.41 31.60 29.29 25.20 21.24 19.74 Alta.Mobile 98.18 110.17 113.48 125.42 128.13 140.43 Alta.Internet 36.31 41.75 44.97 51.57 55.39 60.77 Alta.Television distribution 65.26 64.97 65.05 65.45 62.14 59.49 B.C.Landline 30.68 26.89 27.13 23.96 19.83 18.66 B.C.Mobile 77.98 90.11 92.55 97.98 102.84 113.87 B.C.Internet 34.03 40.64 42.60 49.06 52.76 56.57 B.C.Television distribution 55.82 58.38 58.23 54.17 54.13 52.94 Source: Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending, custom request for a breakdown of Table 11-10-0223- 01 Footnotes http://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb/p2SV.pl?Function=getSurvey&SDDS=35081 Various terms are used to describe the telephone services available to Canadians. Statistics Canada reports on cell phone subscriptions and expenditures. This article refers to cell phones as mobile phones, with expenditures on mobile service including voice, SMS, and data services such as Internet access. The term “landline” is used here to describe wireline telephone service. 2 Region Sask. Sask. Sask. Sask. Alta. lAlta. Alta. !Alta. B.C. B.C. B.C. B.C. - Service Footnotes - 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 50/52 Broadcasting distribution undertakings (BDUs) provide subscription television services to Canadians. They redistribute programming from conventional over-the-air television and radio stations. They also distribute pay audio and discretionary services (i.e. pay, specialty, pay-per-view (PPV) and video-on-demand (VOD) services). Most BDUs are cable, national direct-to-home (DTH) satellite, or Internet Protocol television (IPTV) service providers. In this article, BDU services are referred to as “television distribution services” and exclude digital media subscriptions and watching or streaming television programs or clips over the Internet. 3 Includes all Internet services, regardless of speed.4 The information presented regarding household expenditures on communications services comes from Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending and does not include any projections or CRTC data. 5 See the annual User Guide for the Survey of Household Spending for a description of how expenditures for services bought as a bundle (e.g. Internet, television distribution, and landline) are separated into discrete expenses. 6 Urban centres, also known as small/medium/large population centres, are dened by the following: small centres have populations between 1,000 and 29,999; medium centres have populations between 30,000 and 99,999; and large centres have populations greater than 100,000. For the purposes of this report, urban centres data reports the average of small/medium/large centres. 7 Rural communities are dened as areas with a population of less than 1,000 or a density of 400 or fewer people per square kilometre. 8 Statistics Canada identies the reference person as the household member mainly responsible for household nancial maintenance (for example, paying the mortgage, property taxes, or utility bills). In cases where members share the nancial responsibility equally, one person is chosen to be the reference person. 9 The total number of respondents and responses from the Media Technology Monitor may differ from those in Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending. The age group parameters are also different to correlate with the parameters in the respective surveys. 10 Contents of the ReportContents of the Report 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 51/52 1. Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2013- 2017 2. 2018 Communications Services Pricing in Canada 3. Communications Industry Overview: Telecommunications and Broadcasting 4. Broadcasting Overview 5. Radio Sector 6. Television Sector 7. Broadcasting Distribution Sector 8. Telecommunications Overview 9. Retail Fixed Internet Sector and Broadband Availability 10. Retail Mobile Sector Go directly to: Full table of contents Full list of infographics, gures and tables Data from this report and additional data is available on Open Data in .xlsx and .csv: Report Section Open Data Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2013-2017 Households data 2018 Communications Services Pricing in Canada Pricing data Communications Overview Communications Overview data Broadcasting Overview Broadcasting Overview data Radio Sector Radio data Television Sector Television data Broadcasting Distribution Sector BDU data Telecommunications Overview Telecommunications Overview data Retail Fixed Internet Sector and Broadband Availability Internet data Retail Mobile Sector Mobile data • • --------- Data from this report and additional data is available on Open Data in .xlsx and .csv: Report Section Open Data ---- 4/19/22, 4:07 PM Communications Monitoring Report 2019 - Communications Services in Canadian Households: Subscriptions and Expenditures 2… https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr1.htm#a3 52/52 Date modified: 2020-01-21 Table of contents Pricing in Canada ( Table of contents Pricing in Canada )