Industry Committee on March 21st, 2007

[Sophie Léger]

No. We're saying they should first do an analysis of the current market. Most of the companies or les intervenants in the market say wholesale access is needed for competitors to come in and build their infrastructure in the future.

The Competition Bureau took an approach that was not based on an economic analysis. They came to some conclusions that are not documented by any specialists. They have some conclusions that completely differ from the analysis of the current industry.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

I'm sorry, Mr. Carrie, but you're finished.

I have to go to Mr. Masse.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for appearing here today.

I'll continue with Ms. Léger.

It was interesting. The minister appeared before committee. I asked him if an economic analysis had actually been done, and he admitted that it had not been the case.

In your opinion, another part of the plot that has been developing around this whole situation is that the minister in the budget said he was actually going to do a comprehensive review of Canada's competition policies and would report before the 2008 budget. Wouldn't it make sense for the actual report to be concluded and finished before deregulation? Would it be an advantage to consumers?

[Sophie Léger]

Obviously, yes. On the entire deregulation, I think everyone agrees there needs to be deregulation. We're also in agreement with some of the recommendations of the panel and what they submitted in their recommendations. The only problem is that right now there is no formal economic analysis. What will be the impact on retail prices and on low-income families?

On our side, if there is no more competition, we won't see prices decrease. We will see prices increase. It's very dangerous, because there will be no more competition.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Yes, and it's exactly one of the concerns I have. The fact that this has been done piecemeal, and we don't even have legislation in front of us, is becoming of more concern, with the more testimony we've had as the hearings have proceeded.

I would move to Ms. Gordon. I spent ten years of my life working as an employment specialist on behalf of persons with disabilities. You brought up a very important point with regard to the deferral decision that I think we should be reminded of in terms of third party use.

I have a lot of concern about the deferral decision, because in Windsor, Ontario, the disabled population in my community, like everyone else, were overcharged $75 by Bell. The publicly owned SaskTel only charged $15. There's a big disparity across the country.

One of the things I am concerned about is this. We've had a lot of discussion about policies related to rural Canada, the fact that they feel isolated because they can't get Internet connections, and the qualities you've talked about.

Can you tell the committee how important it is for persons with disabilities to have that in their own homes, even in urban areas? They feel the same type of isolation because they can no longer do the things necessary to connect them with the rest of the community.

[Phyllis Gordon]

Yes, I think it is the essential issue. We talk about universal service as a telecommunications concept. When we started looking at the entire telecommunications model, it struck us as interesting because there were access issues and universal service issues. This is the language of the disability movement, in a funny way, because the entire community has been isolated for so long and disconnected from full participation in Canadian life.

Universal service should really be considered not only as a rural-urban matter; it should also include universal service embedded within the concept, meaning we now have the technology and people with different abilities have the capacity get the phones, computers, and services they need in order to communicate.

If you work in a place where a new chip comes in, if you're working in a university and the chip doesn't allow for a certain kind of accessible communication, you're going to cut off certain employees who might be relying on a new, modern, contemporary technological development.

We could send to you and ask you to read the examples we've given and have testified about in other hearings. Without the phone, without 911, and without the capacity to call in an emergency, if you can't use your phone, you're on your own.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

And it's also a question of those services being available at businesses and places of operation right now. Persons with disabilities have an unemployment rate of over 50%, which is appalling for a modern democratic country to have this type of basically systemic discrimination, in my opinion. But those services also have to be compatible with places of work, to be able to have a fair chance to get a job versus someone else.

[Phyllis Gordon]

Yes.

I think the real point is that the technology is here now, or almost here now. We really are at a stage where the VOIP age can make the difference for people with disabilities if it's properly managed and regulated. If it's left on its own—like mobile phones have been left on their own until extremely recently—they are completely useless for people with disabilities. A blind person can't use it, and a deaf person can't use a mobile phone. That was the unregulated market. Terminal equipment has to be brought into the fold and looked at again very seriously.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I have a brief question to follow up. I'll ask for a quick yes or no from all members of the panel, just to find out whether they support the proposition.

I have been pushing for an ombudsman office, as well as consumer protection. Should that extend to include cell phones, cable, satellite subscribers, and Internet subscribers as well? Should that type of position encompass all those different types of service provisions?

[Robert Proulx]

I would say yes.

[Patricia MacDonald]

Yes.

[Phyllis Gordon]

Yes.

[Sophie Léger]

Yes.

[Claude Beaudoin]

Maybe. As a regulator, we would have to entertain policy decisions.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

That's fine. That's a fair answer.

Any time left, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

You have 30 seconds, Mr. Masse.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Real quickly, Ms. MacDonald, with regard to the Telus cancellation fee of $120, it's appalling. Do they apply it to senior persons with disabilities and people on fixed income as well?

[Patricia MacDonald]

It's applied to everyone who has Internet service with Telus.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

That's unacceptable, and given the recent publicity of problems, you'd think that they would smarten up on situations like this.

[Patricia MacDonald]

If you cancel your phone, you would also be responsible for being charged $400 for the free camera that they give you, which many consumers aren't aware of as well.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

That's just unbelievable.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you, Mr. Masse.

We'll go now to Mr. Brison.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Thank you to all of you for your interventions today. In fact, you've brought to the committee, I believe, perspective and information that is unique to what we've heard on a range of issues, particularly in terms of the impact of telecommunications reform and the potential impact of deregulation without adequate analysis firsthand of economically disadvantaged communities as well as Canadians who are living with disabilities.

The TPRP report does call for a thorough market analysis and review of the current market realities, prior to deregulation. Would you like to see as part of that review a specific reference to the impact on economically disadvantaged communities and on Canadians living with disabilities? Would it help address your concerns if that were part of the analysis prior to moving forward, if we were to flag that early?

[Phyllis Gordon]

If I might, I think that it's not only the economic impact, but it's also the access impact for people with disabilities. It's both issues.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Yes. I'm sorry, I meant the two as separate issues.