TORONTO – New CRTC chair Konrad von Finckenstein joined attendees on the last day of the Canadian Telecom Summit on Wednesday to recap a year of “considerable drama” in the telecom industry and to offer some perspective on what needs to happen next in terms of regulatory review and change.
Highlights for the past year included the Ministry of Industry’s policy direction regarding greater reliance on market forces in the telecom industry, the government’s variances of the CRTC’s previous decisions on regulation of local services using Voice over IP and on local service forbearance, and the mandating of an industry-managed, self-regulatory body to ensure consumers are treated fairly.
“The government’s direction is crystal clear,” von Finckenstein said. “It wants us to ensure there is more reliance on market forces to the extent possible, regulation only in cases of market failure, and regulation in the least intrusive manner necessary to achieve the established goals.”
To that end, the CRTC announced in April that it is reviewing all of its telecom regulations and has asked for public submissions to identify which regulations are the most intrusive and cumbersome for industry members, von Finckenstein said.
“We expect to get your responses shortly, and by mid-July we will announce our action plan,” he said.
He added that, notwithstanding the clear direction from government, the CRTC still has a large task ahead of it. Key items on the agenda include: creating a definition for essential wholesale services; setting prices for services that are not forborne; implementing the local forbearance piece; and assuming responsibility for implementation of the telemarketing do not call list.
Von Finckenstein then turned to the main topic of his keynote address which was his response to the release of a “Model Telecommunications Act” on the previous day at the telecom summit.
“I think it’s an excellent piece. It shows the need for legislative improvement. What the government so far has done is give a policy direction. One really has to take the whole scheme set up by the (Telecom Policy Review report published last year) and put it into legislation,” von Finckenstein said.
“The two authors (of the Model Telecom Act) have done us a great service. We now have a clear, concrete model of what the legislation would look like.”
In particular, von Finckenstein said he endorsed such elements of the “Model Act” as a preference for ex post rather than ex ante regulation, the explicit authority for the CRTC to establish a consumer agency for telecom services, the power to ensure fair play regarding access to buildings, support structures and other infrastructure, and the explicit authority for the CRTC to hire consultants and experts to help with urgent and complex cases.
However, von Finckenstein outlined some areas of the “Model Act” that the CRTC does not necessarily agree with. One point of contention related to the provision for a Telecom Competition Tribunal (TCT) that would replace the current Competition Tribunal. In his view, the proposed mechanism could lead to conflicts of interest, he said.
Furthermore, he said, a proposal to create two classes of CRTC commissioners – some who deal with both telecom and broadcasting, and some who deal only with broadcasting – makes an unnecessary distinction and goes against the whole idea of convergence. For similar reasons, the proposal to have part-time commissioners who work only on broadcasting matters is not a good idea, he said.
In addition, the distinction in the “Model Act” between wholesale, basic and discretionary telecom services would create more problems than it would solve, von Finckenstein said.
One omission in the “Model Act” that von Finckenstein said should be addressed is that there is no provision for the co-operation and sharing of confidential information between the CRTC and the Competition Bureau.
Also, under the authors’ proposed changes to the existing Telecom Act, the language concerning spectrum licensing would see the transfer of authority for spectrum licensing pass from the Minister of Industry to the CRTC. While von Finckenstein agrees licensing authority should be transferred to the CRTC, the proposed change could be interpreted as a provision to transfer spectrum policy-making authority to the CRTC as well. Policy should stay in the hands of the Industry Minister, von Finckenstein said.
“All in all, we have a magnificent draft in front of us that shows how we can (reform telecom policy), and it should be taken forward,” von Finckenstein said, adding that he hoped the “Model Act” would be the impetus for new legislation.
