Peladeau lambasts “contradictory” decision
By Ahmad Hathout
The CRTC said Thursday that Quebecor must come to an agreement on separate terms with Bell unrelated to the commission-approved tariff in order to access the telco’s national wireless network.
After the commission picked Bell’s access rate in final offer arbitration with the regional carrier last fall, Quebecor filed a complaint to the CRTC alleging Bell is attempting to delay its access to the large network by making it agree to terms that were outside of those already approved by the commission – and that there was an expected access date of October 11 for that tariff to come into effect.
Bell argued that its CRTC-approved tariff included a stipulation that the accessing party must first enter into an MVNO access agreement to establish the start date for leasing, which is a prerequisite for the tariff and service to come into effect.
The CRTC on Thursday agreed with Bell’s argument that Quebecor is bound by a separate access agreement – but with a caveat.
“The Commission finds that the MVNO access agreement proposed by Bell Mobility is consistent with the approved terms and conditions established in its MVNO tariff and is thus in compliance with section 24 and subsection 25(1) of the Act,” the commission said Thursday, adding it is consistent with other CRTC-approved tariffs filed by the incumbents.
The regulator, therefore, rejected Quebecor’s argument that other large players don’t have such prerequisites for access as well as its claim that Bell is deliberating delaying access to its network as they did not have an agreed starting date because of the unfulfilled access agreement.
“However, the Commission has previously indicated its expectation that regional providers be able to launch MVNO service as quickly as possible,” the CRTC added.
“While an MVNO access agreement is required to obtain MVNO service, an agreement does not depend on the rates for the MVNO service,” it added. “Moreover, these agreements can take time to finalize. For these reasons, Bell Mobility should have provided QMI with a draft MVNO access agreement when QMI first inquired about the service instead of waiting until the FOA decision was issued. The fact that an agreement is needed should not be used by any party as a reason to delay provision of the service.”
The CRTC also resolved an ancillary issue related to this matter. Because Bell and its advocate on this file, Telus, have a network sharing agreement, the Vancouver-based telecom argued that, in joint-network areas, Quebecor must go through Bell to access Telus’s network – regardless of which telco built it.
“With that agreement, Freedom Mobile and Videotron could send traffic to Bell Mobility that is destined for [Telus’s] portion of the shared network, and it would be treated as MVNO traffic and rated as such,” the CRTC said. “However, [Quebecor] cannot acquire access to [Telus’s] network area via Bell Mobility without first obtaining MVNO service from Bell Mobility.”
The CRTC now “directs” Bell and Quebecor to enter into an MVNO access agreement by September 12. “The date of the agreement will serve as the commercial starting date of the service.”
“Unfortunately, this contradictory decision by the CRTC rewards Bell’s delaying tactics by denying us access to its MVNO service on the launch date of our Canada-wide wireless services,” Quebecor CEO Pierre Karl Peladeau said in an emailed statement Friday. “The CRTC itself acknowledges that Bell has deliberately delayed providing service to Videotron, which is clearly contrary to CRTC policy and the public interest.”
