On shared barriers

Naturally, the Globe and Mail tries to spin the issue as being one of bureaucratic "red tape". But let's be more accurate about the real problem faced by the Peace Region Internet Society in its efforts to bring high-speed wireless Internet access to remote parts of British Columbia: it's been told that it can't apply to use a portion of the public wireless spectrum unless it adopts a corporate share structure:

(T)he society was...deemed un-Canadian because it does not issue shares. The organization instead relies upon a structure where any profits are plunged back into providing services to its members in remote areas.

“The definition of being Canadian-owned and -controlled requires that Canadians beneficially own 80 per cent of the corporation’s voting shares (issued and outstanding), and the [Peace Region society], being a corporation without share capital, does not issue voting shares and therefore doesn’t meet the requirement,” said an e-mail from an Industry Canada official.

Now, it may not be much of a secret that far too many would see organizing wireless Internet service around a non-profit model as being un-Canadian, as what could possibly motivate action other than the pursuit of corporate gain? But it's remarkable to learn that such an assumption is actually codified into law, serving as an entry barrier against cooperative efforts to solve problems within a community.

Hopefully the group involved will find a way to keep improving its services - whether or not that involves going to the trouble of setting up more formal corporate structures in order to meet the Canadian control requirement. But the fact that federal policy dictates that only corporate formations may make use of public airwaves should serve as yet another example of our culture of corporate privilege, rather than reason to complain about "red tape".

(Edit: fixed wording.)