Call to Action #80

Enable federal and provincial co-funding and industry partnerships to provide broadband services to Indigenous communities in rural and remote areas; prioritize Indigenous participation; provide dedicated Indigenous funding for all major infrastructure programs and projects, including Indigenous ownership.

Active Status

Call #80 is a multi-part Call, but its overall purpose is clear: it asks for coordinated action to improve broadband access in rural and remote Indigenous communities. It includes federal and provincial co-funding, industry partnerships, broadband service provision, Indigenous participation, dedicated Indigenous funding within major infrastructure programs and projects, and opportunities for Indigenous ownership.

In Canadian practice, this work is usually described through terms such as 50/10 Mbps high-speed service, underserved rural, remote, and Indigenous communities, Indigenous applicants and recipients, Indigenous-led broadband projects, community engagement and consent, upfront funding, technical training, co-funding, leveraged public and private investment, and infrastructure ownership. These terms show that the Call is not only about connectivity, but also about who plans, funds, builds, benefits from, and owns broadband infrastructure.

The strongest evidence comes from federal and regulator sources, especially the CRTC Broadband Fund and Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada’s Universal Broadband Fund. Provincial-federal evidence from Connecting Communities BC also shows direct broadband investment in underserved communities. Indigenous-led evidence from the First Nations Technology Council helps identify the continuing gaps and impacts of digital exclusion, while Canada Infrastructure Bank broadband projects and NICI/Bell partnership materials show the role of financing and industry partnerships.

The status is Active because Canada has identified, funded, and implemented broadband programs and projects that directly target rural, remote, and Indigenous communities. These programs include mechanisms for Indigenous participation and, in some cases, Indigenous-led or Indigenous-owned networks. Important limitations remain, including gaps in coverage, affordability, speed, reliability, ownership, and coordination, but those limitations do not mean there is no responsive activity.

Supporting Evidence