SpaceX is pushing back against Bell and Northwestel’s proposal to exclude providers with national pricing from a new CRTC retail internet subsidy aimed at improving internet access in Canada’s Far North.
In a letter to the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) on February 28, 2025, Shea Boyd, Senior Counsel at SpaceX, argued that Bell and Northwestel’s claim—that Starlink does not face higher costs to serve the Far North—is inaccurate and misleading.
Bell and Northwestel claim that because Starlink charges the same price nationwide, it does not face additional costs in remote northern areas. Starlink strongly refuted this, stating that low-Earth orbit (LEO) satellites serving the Far North require special orbital adjustments, making them more expensive to operate than satellites covering densely populated areas.
“These satellites are ‘under-utilized’ compared to those serving southern latitudes,” Boyd wrote on February 28, 2025. “The costs of satellites in these orbits are spread across comparatively fewer users and, as such, the per-satellite costs attributable to users in these geographies are materially higher than in other locations globally.”
Despite these higher costs, Starlink has chosen not to charge higher rates for customers in the Far North, instead maintaining a uniform pricing model across Canada. According to Boyd, Bell and Northwestel are asking the CRTC to punish Starlink for not charging more, a move that would ultimately hurt remote communities.
“Bell and Northwestel are essentially asking the CRTC to adopt policies that discourage this type of decision-making and encourage nationwide providers to charge higher rates in the Far North compared to the rest of Canada,” Boyd stated. “This is an outcome that the CRTC surely wants to avoid.”
Starlink also warned that excluding providers with nationwide pricing models would reduce competition and leave consumers with fewer choices.
Boyd pointed out that Northwestel itself has admitted that competition from Starlink has forced the company to lower its prices in the Far North. “Designing a subsidy program aimed at increasing affordability in the Far North while deliberately handicapping a primary driver of pricing and performance pressure amongst competitors would be a poor public policy outcome,” he wrote.
Boyd urged the CRTC to reject Bell and Northwestel’s proposal, arguing that all providers—regardless of pricing structure—should have access to the subsidy. He pointed to the Minister’s 2023 Telecommunications Policy Directive, which prioritizes competition, affordability, and innovation in Canada’s telecom sector.
“The Direction requires the Commission to consider the key objective of ‘how its decisions would promote competition, affordability, consumer interest, and innovation,’” Boyd wrote, emphasizing that excluding Starlink would go againstthese principles.
The CRTC will review all submissions before making a final decision on the subsidy program. If Bell and Northwestel’s proposal is approved, Starlink and other national providers could be excluded, potentially affecting internet affordability in remote northern communities.
In September 2022, Bell CEO Mirko Bibic addressed the impact of Elon Musk’s Starlink, which provides high-speed satellite internet to remote areas, including Canada.
Bibic stated that Bell has “never been against competition” and acknowledged that low-Earth orbit (LEO) satellite providers serve an important niche. However, he downplayed Starlink’s relevance in cities, emphasizing that fibre internet is far superior in urban environments.
“Fibre is vastly better. Capacity, upload speed, download speed—vastly better,” Bibic said, suggesting that while Starlink may benefit remote communities, it isn’t a direct competitor in urban markets.
As of writing, SpaceX has over 6,750 Starlink satellites in low-Earth orbit. As of last July, SpaceX revealed there’s over 400,000 active Canadian customers, for the service which starts at $140 per month. That change in two years clearly has Bell questioning competition now it seems in the Far North.
Thanks @fanCRTCProfling
Want to see more of our stories on Google?
P.S. Want to keep this site truly independent? Support us by buying us a beer, treating us to a coffee, or shopping through Amazon here. Links in this post are affiliate links, so we earn a tiny commission at no charge to you. Thanks for supporting independent Canadian media!
Mirko is trying to protect himself however he's not wrong that fiber is the best way to get connected.
“…satellites serving the Far North require special orbital adjustments”, and that’s causing additional costs, LOL!
If Starlink was a Canadian company, I wouldn’t have any problem with them applying for the government subsidy. Since they are not, no Canadian taxpayer money should subsidize your profits. You are getting plenty of it from your own government. And BTW, government subsidies are never meant to promote the competition, so him quoting Minister’s Telecommunications Policy Directive is laughable.
They have a Canadian division, which employs Canadians
They are still an American company
Which employs Canadians. Boycott will only put the employees out of work.
Who talks about boycott? I don’t have a problem Starlink operating anywhere in Canada, especially where is the most viable option. If they offer the fair prices and reliable service as they mostly do, let them compete with the rest. I am against us as taxpayers subsidizing them. If they can’t make it work with economic prices in the free market and have a profitable business model, then we shouldn’t be making up the difference for their shortfall.
Canadian should invest in Canadian satellites communications, not foreign systems.
Telecom competition in the North is desperately needed. While some services like two-wire telephone are tariffed prices (price cap regulatory framework), internet and cell phone services are supposed to be regulated by consumers through competition among service providers. The protections from competition levied by the CRTC are outdated as witnessed by the recent financial statements in NWTels' annual report. Consumers have no choice in service providers and moreover the telco works hardest at keeping competition out of this service area. If the argument is about network investment to support services, remember the Bell-owned telco has benefitted from numerous funding mechanisms and grants for many years, In fact the CRTC admonished NWTel for their lack of investment with monies they had received. Read it here: https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2011/2011-771.htm Consumer choice, pricing and service levels need to be determined by this marketplace and competition is the best way to achieve this. I urge the CRTC to amend their policies regarding competition in Canada's north so that citizens and businesses here may enjoy the same benefits of telecoms competition that are enjoyed in the rest of the country.
That's nuts. Where people need it the most, it's already operating, is a comity product (you can just go pick one up from Costco), and is working well.
Bell tries to get it banned.
you should move to another country
Yes, I have. I come here to warn others about Canada.
The same virtue signaling commies decry subsidies for Starlink because "it's an American company" but have no problem sinking 2Bn in Telesat…also owned by an American VC
No one seems to have any issues with handing out "subsidies" to foreign EV makers or buyers in Canada.
No one seems to have any issues with handing out "subsidies" to foreign EV makers or buyers in Canada.
Bell wants to maintain high prices and control of the Canadian Market. We need more competition everywhere in Canada, from telecom to airlines. I don't get the loyalty to Canadian brands after they've been gauging us, with the aid of the government, for decades.
To those valiant anti communist warriors, it’s not commies who object this subsidy, just people with a shred of honesty and aversion to boot licking. Rejecting subsidizing an American company with Canadian taxpayers money doesn’t mean condoning waste and incompetence the government is displaying elsewhere. Or, defending Bell and that entire cartel. Failing to see that is not a question of intelligence but integrity.