The following are my comments to the proposed Telus Improvement Plan to extend service to unserved communities and upgrade service in communities with a lower grade of service:

Telus is a private company.  Why should they provide service to an entity that cannot afford to pay up-front costs and provide continuing profits?   A subsidy by government or other customers should not be contemplated.  Is Telus not removing pay phones because of non-profitability?  Why should these pay phones not be subsidized?  Perhaps other entities should also be subsidized, i.e.,those living on low income, single parents, pensioners or those simply out-of-work due to a downturn in the economy.  I am sure others groups would want to be included in this category.This subsidy appears to be a method of raising capital to increase the clientele base while improving services to others.  I thought the raising of capital monies by private companies was normally performed by methods other than seeking subsidies from existing customers.

How many dollars are necessary to provide service to these areas?  Perhaps a one, two or three-time charge to current users will suffice and may be found more agreeable by current customers as no word is mentioned as to when this subsidy is to be removed.  This sounds suspiciously like an increase in rates forever in the disguise of assisting or helping others.

People sometimes live in remote or unpopulated areas of their own free will or because of a life style.  Why should everyone else subsidize them to allow them to do so?

With the advent of cell phones, is it necessary to provide landlines or is it more profitable, economical and wiser to use the cell phone technology?  Even third world counties are finding it more rational to use cell phones.

Cell phones are replacing landlines in heavy populated areas.  Is this subsidy a clever promotion to make people move to the more profitable cell phones?  If this is not the case, will people in heavy populated areas change to cell phone usage only to avoid the subsidy.  The cost of land line usage and cell phone usage together will become prohibitive.  If people switch to cell phone usage only, this will lessen or make the subsidy decrease in value so that the service costs will not be recouped and other increases will have to be contemplated.

I believe that if this subsidy progresses, current customers such as myself, will be changing to another company for long-distance calling and for cell-phone usages.  I am now almost at the point where my landline is unnecessary and I can rely totally on cell phone usage.  If this happens in great numbers, then the revenue of Telus (including the subsidy) will be greatly reduced.

Respectively submitted by:

Robert Wilson

#213 – 4074 Gellatly Road

Westbank, BC  V4T 2S8

Home #:  (250) 707-1056

Cell    #:  (250) 212-9756