Reports indicate that Industry Minister Christian Paradis could unveil
the government's
spectrum
auction and
telecom
foreign ownership policies this month. My weekly technology law
column (
Toronto
Star version,
homepage
version) provided a preview of some the key issues. While interest
in spectrum auction policy is typically limited to
telecom companies and business analysts, all Canadians have a stake in
this decision. The available spectrum - known as the 700 MHz spectrum -
opens up a host of possibilities for new innovation, competitors, and
open Internet access. It is viewed as particularly valuable spectrum
since it easily penetrates walls, making it ideal for delivering
wireless high-speed Internet services.
Auctioning the spectrum raises a host of critical policy choices.
Topping the list is whether the government tinkers with the auction
framework to help foster greater marketplace competition. Some of the
large incumbents unsurprisingly favour an âopen auctionâ with no
bidding limits, but assuming Paradis concludes that some measures are
needed, the choice will likely come down to either a spectrum set-aside
that reserves some spectrum for new entrants and smaller companies or
spectrum caps.
The last spectrum auction included a set-aside, which opened the door
to a handful of new competitors such as Globalive, PublicMobile, and
Mobilicity. A further set-aside may make sense since this round of new
entrants may look to use the spectrum primarily for wireless broadband
services, providing a potential alternative to the cable and telecom
dominance.
If another set-aside proves too unwieldy, a spectrum cap, which would
limit the amount of spectrum any single company could hold, may emerge
as the alternative. A spectrum cap might prove effective if combined
with two additional conditions.
First, the implementation of a use-it-or-lose it principle that would
require all bidders to use the spectrum within a defined period. The
use-it-or-lose-it approach would help guard against the hoarding of
spectrum, particularly for incumbents who may overbid in the hopes of
keeping new competitors out of the market.
Second, safeguards against opportunistic flipping of the spectrum with
the prohibition on its sale within the first five years of the auction.
The trio of policies â caps, mandatory use, and a block on transfer,
may increase the number of successful bidders.
Another critical issue is who should be entitled to bid for the
spectrum. The last spectrum auction featured Canadian ownership
requirements, thereby limiting potential entrants. Given that Canada is
one of the only developed countries that has retained significant
telecom foreign ownership restrictions, the auction provides a
tailor-made opportunity to eliminate the restrictions by opening the
market to all bidders.
The spectrum policy decision will also determine which spectrum is
available for auction and which is reserved for alternate purposes. The
government has already indicated that it plans to grant some of the
spectrum to law enforcement agencies, which intend to create their own
emergency wireless network.
Many leading technology companies have recommended allocating some of
the spectrum for unlicensed purposes. This spectrum, which would be
free to anyone to use without the need for licence or government
approval, could yield new services and technologies.
Beyond the technical details of the spectrum auction, the final
billion-dollar question is what the government should do with the
auction proceeds. While the $4 billion in proceeds from the last
auction went into general revenues, this auction represents the best â
perhaps only â opportunity to access billions of non-tax dollars for
the digital economy. The money could be used to support broadband
initiatives, digital content creation, and digital skills
programs.