TORONTO – Industries have converged. Companies have converged. It’s about time the laws and regulations covering the telecom and broadcast worlds converged, too.
That’s the message CRTC chairman Konrad von Finckenstein brought to delegates today at the 2008 Canadian Telecom Summit. (Ed note: This story is a compendium of von Finckenstein’s written text and his verbal comments during the speech.)
After outlining a number of changes implemented and challenges overcome in the past 12 months on the telecom file, the chairman noted that with all that is changing in the industries the CRTC oversees, the Commission is bound by two pieces of legislation – the Telecom Act and the Broadcasting Act – which often don’t jibe with market realities, or even federal government directives.
Calling convergence “the elephant in the room” that no one addresses properly, von Finckenstein pointed at Rogers as an example of a company that is of the new century: part broadcaster, ISP, cable company, telco, wireless firm, publisher and digital media producer.
He didn’t mention other companies by name, but there are various others whose activities fall under the Broadcasting and Telecom Acts, making regulation a difficult juggling act in 2008, especially when the federal government is telling the Commission to let market forces rule their thinking – while the Acts mention no such thing.
While the Commission has been hard at work internally reorganizing itself and adjusting what policies it feels it should, the Regulator can only do so much unless the legislation governing it and the industries it oversees, changes.
“(T)he telecom industry has converged with the broadcasting industry. Phone companies deliver television, and cable companies deliver phone calls. And they’re chasing each other’s customers,” said the chair. “What has not yet converged is the legislation and the regulation.”
“It’s our view that eventually but inevitably, telecommunications and broadcasting must be governed under one converged Act.”
However, the CRTC is about to embark on another round of altering what it can change. “We will soon be making public a series of changes that we are proposing to make in our Rules of Procedure. Our aim is to harmonize and streamline those rules to suit the converging world in which we are already operating,” he said.
Von Finckenstein envisions the Commission having a much larger role in dispute resolution in a de-regulated world, since the federal government has told the CRTC to regulate in an ex poste fashion from now on. “I see us in the future being much more active in this environment,” he said.
But it won’t always be the traditional hearing, where stakeholders face commissioners in a stuffy room in Gatineau. There will be faster decisions where the hearing, for example, is held via video conference.
All these structural changes at the Commission and policy renovations it can make before changing the Acts, “will take a long time,” added von Finckenstein. “There will be lots of interim steps.”
“These changes will also help us pre-position ourselves for future legislative developments. They have emerged from a major strategic review… we launched it to ensure that the CRTC adapts itself to suit the changing realities… Everything that can be common, will be common.
“The changes in Rules of Procedure will, of course, affect all stakeholders in the industry. We will therefore be inviting your comments on them. We can also respond to convergence by seeking a more rational assignment of responsibilities. This will require amendment of the existing Telecommunications Act.”
The most newsworthy example, said von Finckenstein, is overall spectrum regulation. While it now falls under Industry Canada’s mandate, it should be something the CRTC oversees. The 2006 Telecom Policy Review, the document the federal government has been using to direct the CRTC to act on the telecom file, also says this.
“Licensing for spectrum for telecom and broadcasting should rest with the Commission,” he said.
Simply, “there is a lot of hard work to be done.”
