TORONTO – Recommendations by the Telecommunications Policy Review (TPR) panel, published in its March 2006 report, may have taken a step closer to implementation today with the release of a “Model Telecommunications Act”, co-authored by a former TPR panel member, Hank Intven, partner of the law firm McCarthy Tétrault LLP.
Attendees of the Canadian Telecom Summit received copies of the 456-page “Model Act” this afternoon during a special presentation by Intven and his co-author, Mary Dawson, a former associate deputy minister of justice and independent advisor to McCarthy Tétrault.
The TPR report released last year called for a more deregulated, market-based approach to telecom policy, and the objective of drafting the “Model Act” was to demonstrate how the TPR recommendations could be implemented into Canada’s telecom laws, Intven said.
He said it’s being presented as a “drafting guide” for the federal government, parliamentarians and other industry stakeholders, but ultimately all policy decisions will be up to government and parliament.
“We send it out into the world of policy and legislation with some temerity,” Intven said.
He added that “model acts” have been drafted previously in other legislative areas and resulted in the eventual passing of legislation.
During his presentation, Intven revealed that Bell Canada and Telus funded the drafting of the “Model Act”. He then went on to emphasize that the drafted “Model Act” does not suggest additional telecom policy changes or “improvements” to the TPR recommendations.
In a press conference held later, Intven also admitted that Bell and Telus approached him about drafting the “Model Act” roughly two months after the TPR panel issued its report in March 2006.
Asked how he would counter the perception of potential influence on the part of Bell and Telus in the “Model Act” drafting process, Intven said he believes the work speaks for itself.
“The best thing to do is look at the work and judge it on its merits,” Intven said.
There was no industry input into the drafting of the “Model Act”, Intven said, adding it was a very technical process in which he and Dawson translated the TPR recommendations into legislative language.
He also noted that Bell and Telus don’t agree with all of the TPR recommendations and have reserved the right to argue their position against those aspects of the “Model Act” they disagree with, if it gets to the point where legislation is being debated in government.
Now what remains to be seen is how the “Model Act” will be received by key stakeholders in Industry Canada, the CRTC and the Competition Bureau – all of whom will be making presentations at the Canadian Telecom Summit on Wednesday.
