Why Rural and Remote Internet Still Lags
A farm family 30 minutes from a major city has slower internet than urban apartments have had for a decade. A Northern community relies on satellite with latency too high for video calls. A cottage region has no broadband options at all. Despite years of policy attention and billions in funding, rural and remote internet still lags far behind urban service.
The Gap
The CRTC's universal service objective—50 Mbps download, 10 Mbps upload, unlimited data—represents basic broadband. Most urban Canadians have access exceeding this; many rural and remote Canadians do not.
Approximately 10% of Canadian households lack access to 50/10 service. In rural areas, the figure is much higher. In remote and Northern communities, it approaches 100%.
Even where broadband technically exists, it may be unreliable, expensive, or capped in ways that limit usefulness.
Why the Gap Persists
Economics
Broadband infrastructure is expensive to deploy. The cost per subscriber is far higher in areas with low population density. Running fiber to scattered rural homes costs orders of magnitude more per connection than connecting dense urban buildings.
Private companies invest where returns are highest. Urban areas get upgraded; rural areas wait. The business case for rural broadband is weak without subsidy.
Geography
Canada's geography is challenging. Vast distances, difficult terrain, and harsh weather complicate infrastructure deployment. Northern communities may be accessible only by air or winter road, making equipment delivery expensive.
Technology Limitations
Technologies that work in urban areas may not work rurally. Cable and fiber require physical lines. DSL degrades with distance from central offices. Fixed wireless requires line-of-sight and sufficient towers. Satellite has latency and capacity limitations.
5G and low-earth-orbit satellite (Starlink) offer new possibilities but are not universal solutions. 5G requires dense tower networks; satellite has capacity constraints and remains expensive.
Policy and Funding Gaps
Government programs have provided billions for rural broadband, but funding has not closed the gap. Programs have been criticized as slow, bureaucratic, and favoring incumbent providers who may not prioritize underserved areas.
Universal service obligations have not been enforced with the rigor that would ensure rural service. The gap persists because policy has not made closing it a binding requirement.
Consequences of the Gap
Economic: Businesses cannot operate effectively without broadband. Economic development is constrained. Agricultural technology, telemedicine, remote work—all depend on connectivity that rural areas lack.
Educational: Students in areas without broadband cannot access online learning, research, or the digital skills development their urban peers receive.
Healthcare: Telehealth requires connectivity. Rural residents who most need telehealth to overcome distance from healthcare facilities are least likely to have the connectivity to use it.
Civic: As government services move online, lack of access means lack of access to government.
Social: Young people leave rural areas partly because they lack the connectivity necessary for modern life and work.
Approaches to Closing the Gap
Subsidy Programs
The Universal Broadband Fund and provincial programs subsidize rural broadband deployment. Subsidies cover the gap between deployment cost and commercial viability.
Community Networks
Community-owned networks, cooperatives, and municipal initiatives have brought broadband to some underserved areas. Local ownership ensures that communities' interests are prioritized.
Technology Evolution
Low-earth-orbit satellite services like Starlink offer new options for remote areas. While expensive and capacity-limited, they provide connectivity where nothing else reaches.
Regulatory Requirements
Stronger universal service obligations—with accountability for meeting them—could require providers to serve rural areas as a condition of operating anywhere.
The Question
If rural and remote Canadians have waited decades for broadband that urban Canadians take for granted, then current approaches have not worked well enough. What would it take to actually close the gap—not in another decade but soon? Should broadband be treated as essential infrastructure that government ensures universally, like electricity or roads? And how should the costs of serving high-cost areas be shared—by all ratepayers, by taxpayers, or by the communities themselves?