Commission should also call Quebec government on the carpet
TORONTO – The CRTC should bring back informal closed door meetings with the industry to improve the regulator's knowledge, cool down temperatures at formal hearings and allow some things to be said that are avoided in open hearings, said Mirko Bibic, Bell Canada’s chief legal and regulatory officer.
He made the suggestion Tuesday during the annual regulatory blockbuster panel at the Canadian Telecom Summit in Toronto, a session where provocative and entertaining arguments are often made.
“The (hearing) process has become ‘overly judicialized’,” Bibic (pictured, right, with PIAC's John Lawford) said. “I think there has been a large absence of dialogue between all stakeholders in a collaborative fashion, including the Commission, because only time we talk is in the confines of a formal hearing.
“We should be going back to a quasi-judicial collaborative process and we should to it without sacrificing access and due process for all parties. I think back to some of the process that were used in the past on particular topics when everyone got an opportunity to come in and talk to all commissioners and key staff … who would learn about where the industry was going and stakeholder concerns, and that would feed into the planning process of the commission.
“That's completely gone…and I think it’s a mistake,” added Bibic. His fellow panel members agreed, as long such meetings were made available to any group requesting one.
The suggestion came after panelists – including Ted Woodhead, Telus' senior vice-president of federal government and regulatory affairs; Bram Abramson, chief legal and regulatory officer at Internet provider TekSavvy Solutions, and David Watt, senior vice-president regulatory at Rogers Communications – criticized commission chair Jean-Pierre Blais for the way he handled the April hearing into basic telecom services for consumers. Until now that meant primarily telephone service.
But at the end of the first of scheduled three weeks of hearings Blais suddenly announced it was evident that broadband Internet access was “vital” to residents and didn't have to be debated, a commentary which was a surprise to participants. It seemed obvious that Internet access and some sort of minimum speed will be made part of the mandatory basic service.
Panelists may have agreed with Blais, but as Abramson said, it would have been nice to know before the hearing started if the commissioners had made up their minds.
Bibic also complained about Blais' “lament for an absence of a (national) broadband strategy, and perceived lack of leadership from the federal government.”
To his call for a return to informal meetings, panel moderator and Cartt.ca editor Greg O'Brien noted there would be calls that it was a plot to give big companies special access to the regulator.
No, replied Bibic, it would be access for all stakeholders. “It allows everyone to share certain things you wouldn’t say in a public hearing other than file a confidential response. Think about what the Commission loses when they don't have a full appreciation of where every stakeholder is going on a particular issue – not today but in a year or five years.”
Sessions could be held every January, he suggested, possibly as a “town hall” or even through Facebook.
“Hearings have gotten out of control, there's no real effort to keep it on message.” – John Lawford, PIAC
Watt agreed, arguing that in “a less hostile environment” the CRTC might not have come out with its wireless code decision that banned three year wireless contract, which Watt believes didn't make sense as it removed a choice for consumers.
Woodhead was also on board, because, he said, the Commission doesn't know what it's like to run a billion dollar company.
As well, John Lawford, executive director of the Public Interest Advocacy Centre, somewhat agreed. “Hearings have gotten out of control, there's no real effort to keep it on message,” he said. “I’ve been in those (closed door) meetings and they were helpful in some ways.”
There was also the expected colourful language we often hear during this annual CTS session: Woodhead complained the basic telecom services hearing “was like unicorns and fairy dust,” with submitters saying ‘I need synchronous 1 GB up and down' as an obligatory basic service.
“That just fantastical,” Woodhead said. “That's not going to happen.”
There was also some unanimity on the need for the CRTC or the federal government to challenge the province of Quebec's proposed Bill 74 which would force Internet service providers in the province to block access to online gambling sites that aren’t approved by the government. The law, said O’Brien, is censorship.
“Who thought a government would order providers – a government who operates a monopoly on gaming – would seek to require ISPs to block legal content?” asked Woodhead. “That is about as offensive to the net neutrality principle as anything anyone could dream up. And apparently, nobody cares.”
The CRTC should ask the Quebec government to come to the regulator's office and explain itself, he added.
In the audience was former CRTC chair Konrad von Finckenstein, who in an interview wouldn't comment on the closed door sessions idea but did say on the Quebec bill that “I don't understand where their authority comes from. I think it's a violation of net neutrality and I hope someone takes this matter to court.”
Photo by Howard Solomon
