| > The fear being that if Canada deregulates fully and opens critical sectors like telecomms etc. to full competition we will completely lose these industries to US (or Chinese, etc.) interests. I have never understood the reluctance of successive governments to allow foreign competition in our telecom markets. Telus, Shaw, Bell, and Rogers are all widely held public companies. They answer to global shareholders. Yet, I can accept the argument writ large that some degree of sovereign relatedness for significant industries is sensible in a world where many foreign companies receive illicit government support for strategic reasons. The best solution to bring down prices while protecting corporate sovereignty is a state-owned provincial provider. Mobile prices in Saskatchewan are significantly lower because of SaskTel. At times, yes, even a boring state-owned telecom is a good thing. Rogers/Telus/etc resist this notion, yet prices are evidentially a great deal cheaper in that province. IMHO, the feds should create a fund to help provinces and municipalities build their own public broadband and mobile infrastructure, with the stated aim of competing with big-telecom. |
This doesn’t happen because people involved are less competent, it’s just that if they make some bad decisions or have some bad luck, they won’t be forced to answer to reality by the market by e.g. running out of money or being beaten by competition. Public corporations are too easy to keep going by continuing to fund through state coffers; to shut them down suggests that leaders made a mistake, so instead we throw good money after bad. It may not have been a mistake to attempt a public option, however even good ideas can fail for lots of reasons, and incentives just make it too hard to fail when it should.
To me the LCBO is the shining example of this: any reasonable analysis that compares with private competition for alcohol sales (e.g. Alberta, BC) would find Ontario has much worse store coverage, worse selection and lower net revenue per unit of alcohol .. yet, no politician would dare visit such an idea, since it suggests government (and its leaders) and ineffective.
The best thing would be to do a Yozma-style funding program. The government offers to match investment and provides clear buy-out terms for successful cases. If you lower the downside risk, you’ll get the competition you want in the space.