Industry Committee on Jan. 11th, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Good afternoon, everyone. I'll now call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 106 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Industry and Technology.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders.

Pursuant to a request by more than four members of the committee under Standing Order 106(4), the committee is meeting to discuss a potential study of cell phone package price increases.

Before giving the floor to my colleagues who submitted this request, I would like to wish you all a happy new year. I'm happy to see you again, even on a virtual basis and even though I was hoping that we would see each other a bit later. However, these things happen in parliamentary life. This meeting is being held with good reason.

Without further ado, I'll give the floor to Ms. Ferreri, who asked to speak.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Mr. Masse, go ahead.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I just want to recognize the passing of Ed Broadbent today, a mentor and good friend of mine with whom I served in Parliament. I wanted to acknowledge that publicly at the first possible moment.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you, Mr. Masse.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

I'm sorry for your loss, Mr. Masse.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Yes, I offer our condolences on behalf of the industry committee. Ed Broadbent was a great Canadian and parliamentarian. Thanks for bringing it up, MP Masse.

Ms. Ferreri, the floor is yours.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Thank you so much. Thank you for letting me sit at INDU.

Thank you to MP Masse for that as well. It's great to get that on the record right off the hop.

Happy new year to everybody.

I actually think Mr. Perkins had his hand up before me, but I can go first. I saw his hand come up first, but I'm happy to defer to you, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Your hand appeared first on my screen here, but I can yield the floor to MP Perkins. He's second on the list.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

That's great. Thank you so much.

Obviously we're here today to discuss something super important. As you've seen over the holidays—as I'm sure many of you have had the opportunity to be in your constituencies and, over these past couple of weeks, you've had the opportunity to meet, listen, maybe catch some phone calls, have some coffee chats, work in your constituency offices and hear the struggles that are happening in and around our country—there is some genuine suffering that is happening. Christmastime is a very difficult time for a lot of people.

In my community of Peterborough—Kawartha, we obviously have a lot of suffering happening with increased homelessness, etc., and seniors on fixed incomes.

Today we call this emergency meeting. Conservatives have put forth a motion to resume this committee, because one of the things we can do effectively in our role as the official opposition is to call out the government when it has made promises to Canadians. The promise that was made was that cellphone bills would not increase, and we've seen that not come true right now, basically, with what's happening.

We've put forth a motion, which we're going to be discussing here today. The motion that my colleague Mr. Perkins has put forward is:

That, in relation to recent reports that Rogers will increase customer cell phone bills following a pledge by Rogers CEO Tony Staffieri that “prices are going to come down” as part of the $26 billion Rogers-Shaw merger approved by the Liberal Minister of Innovation, Science, and Industry, after committee experts and the Competition Commissioner warned that the deal would lead to higher prices for consumers, the committee therefore agree to be immediately recalled to undertake a study of up to four meetings, of at least two hours per meeting, to study the impact of the Liberal-approved merger and that these meetings begin at the earliest opportunity and conclude by Friday January 26....

The motion goes on to say more, but I'm going to let my colleague read it into the record because it is his motion that he put forward.

What I want to say right off the hop is that in doing some of this research.... I'm a guest, obviously, on this INDU committee, but when we look at this article, we see that the Liberal industry minister has put this on the record. This is a reference from Melissa Tait at The Globe and Mail. These were his words:

“If Canadians do not begin to see clear and meaningful reductions in price, within a reasonable amount of time, I will have no choice but to seek further legislative and regulatory powers to drive down prices in Canada,” Mr. Champagne said at the time.

I'm assuming that Liberal MPs, NDP MPs and everyone across the board is going to support this motion. The question from these comments, especially in a cost of living crisis when one in four Canadians can't afford to pay their bills—that's according to another article—is, what is a reasonable amount of time? That would be my first question about that: What is that reasonable amount of time?

I'm assuming there is support across all party lines to delve into this to help best support their constituents who are having a really hard time making ends meet, especially in January. For those of you who don't know, this coming Monday is considered “blue Monday”, the most depressing day of the year, when a lot of those credit card bills come due because people had to use credit to pay for Christmas bills. This is going to be a very challenging month, going into the winter months, to try to cover those costs. The least we can do is to ensure that people are not paying more for their cellphones, which many people need.

I'm going to end with this one other comment, because I think it's really important when we talk about cellphones. This was sent to me by Tracey Filtness Smart. She says, “I pay well over $250/mo for myself and my son's phone. We are both disabled and absolutely need this service”. I think it's really important to have on the record that for many people this isn't a luxury; this is a lifeline of communication when we talk about cell service.

She continues, “but it's so hard to budget for it. Having my cellphone saved my life in 2019 as I had an aneurysm rupture and stroke but was able to dial 911 in time to get medivaced out. My phone is always with me for this reason. I pray it doesn't go up in price or I'm not sure how we can continue to pay. I am sure there are many other people in this situation as well. I appreciate you [for putting forth this motion, Mr. Perkins.]”

With that, I'll leave it with my colleagues, but I really urge my colleagues today that this is our duty. We are here as elected representatives to ensure that Canadians have a life that is not of suffering but is rather of the opportunity to live.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you, MP Ferreri.

Before I turn it over to MP Perkins, I have on my list MP Perkins, MP Vis, MP Lemire, MP Gourde and MP Masse.

Mr. Perkins, go ahead.

I believe you're on mute. This is the first time I've said that in 2024.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

I know that sometimes you wish you had the control of my mute button, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, everyone, for coming to the meeting while we're on a constituency session.

I too would like to begin by acknowledging, if I could, Ed Broadbent's passing today. I was a young staffer, as many of you know, in the Mulroney days when Mr. Broadbent was the leader of the NDP. He was a remarkable leader for that party and a great parliamentarian who represented the people of Oshawa well in his many years in Parliament. I'd just like to acknowledge that.

Also, on a happier note, I acknowledge that MP Turnbull signed in today with his new addition. We haven't had a chance to meet since you had your second child. Congratulations, Ryan. We're all very happy for you.

The letter that was sent in calling for this meeting—for those who are watching it's an emergency meeting that has to be called within five days of five MPs signing a letter—discusses whether or not we should have a particular study, an urgent study, on an issue that has come up.

This committee, as we know, is very busy with Bill C-27 and is still awaiting the next level of scrutiny of the Stellantis contracts. It was a bit surprising, I think, for most of us to see. I think it was announced on January 3, and it was in most of the media on January 4 of this new 2024 year. It was a kind of shocking way to greet the year that the most expensive cellphone provider in the world, Rogers, announced that apparently they're not making enough money and that cellphone packages are going up seven to nine dollars.

As my colleague MP Ferreri said, this is a very ubiquitous thing. It is probably the thing that most Canadians share in common: 83% of Canadians, by the last time I looked, have a cellphone. That's more people than own a house. More than anything else, probably, Canadians have a cellphone, and for the reasons that MP Ferreri outlined. It's our communication lifeline, our phone lifeline and our connection to the world through the Internet. It's our emergency lifeline, as she outlined in that difficult situation of her constituent.

This is a cellphone price increase when, a year ago almost to the day, the big three—Shaw, Rogers and Quebecor—were before this committee saying that we needed to have the sale of the Shaw assets and that it would increase competition in this country and reduce prices for Canadians. We know that a month after the Freedom sale was done in April 2023, just in that one month, before the ink had even dried on the Liberal government's approval of Quebecor buying Freedom Mobile and Rogers buying the Shaw assets—and those two transactions removed two cellphone competitors from the Canadian market—Quebecor also put up Freedom's prices, even though they said they would not do that. They waited only a month to do that.

Like I said, why is that important? Well, 83% of us have a cellphone and we're in the middle of this cost of living crisis. We know that since 2016 Statistics Canada has reported that Canadians are paying almost 20%—I know it feels like more to most people—more per household out of their income than they were prior to 2016 for cellphone services. International studies, many of them that we know, show prices for cellphone services in the U.S., Australia and other countries are actually declining while ours are going up. Cansumer reported in August of 2023 that Canadians pay 20% more than Americans and 170% more than Australians for the average cellphone package.

We hear the excuses. We heard before this committee from big telcos that the size of Canada is the reason. The size of the country with its low population is the reason we pay more. Rogers, Bell and Telus, though, are the most expensive cellphone providers in the world. I mentioned at the time a year ago—and I'll say it again—that their operating profits are quite high. Their gross operating profits are 62% to 65%. That's twice as high as the profits of the major carriers of cellphone and mobile services in the United States and Australia.

How bad is it? In Canada, the average price per gigabyte of data on your cellphone is $5.37. In a country larger than Canada—because we hear that excuse all the time about the size of Canada—in Russia, not that they're in vogue these days, they now pay only 25¢ U.S. per gigabyte. Australia has about the same density and land area as Canada. They have more competition, and they pay only 44¢ a gigabyte for data on their phones, while we're paying over five dollars and our cellphone providers are making twice the level of gross profit.

It's clear that what we have here is a problem with competition. Those who have this protected status take us, consumers, and, quite frankly, the federal government for granted. It's the federal government that protects Bell, Telus, Rogers and Quebecor, this oligopoly, because they use airwaves that taxpayers pay them for. It's that protection that allows them to have this double-the-average operating profit and be the massively most expensive cellphone providers in the world.

Last year the Liberal government approved the sale of Shaw's assets to Rogers and Quebecor, removing two of the competitors in the market. The Liberals claimed at the time that the companies would respect the fact that prices would still go down, even though there would be fewer competitors. It has never actually happened in any competitive market that you have reduced competitors and prices go down. Now Rogers and Quebecor are thumbing their noses at this Liberal government by raising prices.

The Liberal Minister of Industry, in meetings, has had tough talks, we hear. We've heard it in the House that there have been tough talks on groceries and on cellphones, but the prices still go up. What did he say about cellphones? He said, “I'm watching closely”, as MP Ferreri outlined. Watching closely doesn't help people pay the bills when the Liberals promised that the prices would go down, but they're actually going up.

Telus and Bell are refusing to answer the media's questions, in response to Rogers' increase, about what they plan to do. If they weren't planning to increase prices, we know that they would say, “We're not planning to increase prices,” to the media. I guess they must be planning increases as well, or they would come clean on that in public.

Because the Liberal Minister of Industry, who helps oversee this cost of living crisis that we have.... These cellphone companies came before this committee a year ago, and before the Competition Bureau, claiming they would reduce prices if the Freedom sale went through. They claimed that, but they're doing the opposite now by increasing the cost to Canadians. That's why this committee needs to have urgent hearings with these players as to why they said a year ago we should trust them and prices would go down, but now they've done the opposite.

Canadians want this gouging to stop. It has been going on for too long. Not a single Canadian I know who doesn't work for Bell, Telus or Rogers thinks that prices have gone down. I suspect the people who work for them think that, but they may be the only ones.

Mr. Chair, I think the clerk has a copy of the study motion that I would like to propose. If she could circulate it, I'll just read it out for the committee members while it's being circulated. I move:

That, in relation to recent reports that Rogers will increase customer cell phone bills following a pledge by Rogers CEO Tony Staffieri that “prices are going to come down” as part of the $26 billion Rogers-Shaw merger approved by the Liberal Minister of Innovation, Science, and Industry, after committee experts and the Competition Commissioner warned that the deal would lead to higher prices for consumers—

I'll interrupt myself in the middle of it. This committee, by the way, recommended unanimously not to approve that deal, but the government went ahead anyway.

I'll continue:

—the committee therefore agree to be immediately recalled to undertake a study of up to four meetings, of at least two hours per meeting, to study the impact of the Liberal-approved merger and that these meetings begin at the earliest opportunity and conclude by Friday January 26, in order for the committee to return to its regular agenda when Parliament resumes, and that the committee invite the following witnesses to appear before the committee:

(a) François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, and Simon Kennedy, Deputy Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada;

(b) Tony Staffieri, CEO and President of Rogers; Mirko Bibic, President and CEO of BCE; Darren Entwistle, President and CEO of Telus; and Pierre Karl Péladeau, President and CEO of Quebecor Media;

(c) Navdeep Bains, Chief Corporate Affairs Officer for Rogers Communication, and former Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry;

(d) Matthew Boswell, Commissioner of Competition; and

(e) all other witnesses deemed relevant by the committee;

and, that the committee request that the department of Innovation, Science and Economic Development provide a progress report on Roger’s five legally binding investment commitments to improve connectivity over the next five years; and, subject to the approval of the recognized party’s whips, and the availability of meeting slots from the House of Commons, the committee hold additional meetings and/or extend committee meetings beyond an hour on each allotted day for each meeting on this matter.

We have a full agenda. I've suggested that we try to do these meetings before the 26th. I know that's maybe a challenge, given that's it's not next week but the week after. I understand that we all have, at various times during the week, the presession caucus gatherings. As always when we all propose and study motions here, we're open to improvements and suggestions on ways fellow committee members think we might be able to get this done within the agenda timing and with the many pressures that all of us have with various meetings.

With that, Mr. Chair, I'll leave it there for now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you very much, Mr. Perkins.

All members have heard the terms of the motion. It was also distributed electronically earlier today.

We're now debating the motion moved by Mr. Perkins.

Go ahead, Mr. Vis.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Congratulations to Mr. Turnbull on the birth of his new child, and my condolences to the New Democratic Party and everyone across political lines who appreciates the massive contributions Mr. Broadbent made to our country.

This week, like probably some of you, I went grocery shopping. My wife sent me out late at night to buy a bunch of fruit for our kids. School started this week in British Columbia. No, it was last week, and.... No, it was this week. Man, all the days are running together. School started this week.

I was going to buy all of the stuff for their lunches and everything, and at the front of the Real Canadian Superstore on Gladwin Road in Abbotsford, they were selling little cartons of blueberries for six dollars. Where I come from, we're the blueberry capital of Canada. We literally produce more blueberries and process more blueberries than practically anywhere else in North America, yet for literally a handful of blueberries, the grocery stores are charging six dollars. That does not relate to the motion at hand, but it does relate to the cost of living crisis that Canadians are facing. I've spoken to a number of people at local food banks over the Christmas break and with constituents in some of those coffee chats that my colleague Michelle mentioned, and it's very clear that Canadians are struggling.

Some kids who go to my son's school, Centennial Park Elementary School in Abbotsford, rely on the food bank for lunch every week. If Rogers decides to increase a parent's bill by nine dollars or $10 a month, it doesn't seem like much, but these parents are already spending more than they're making every month just to support their kids. That's very common these days. Yes, nine dollars or $10 for a family struggling to get by does make a difference.

This is also important because on January 25, 2023, the CEO of Rogers, Mr. Staffieri, came to this committee. He made it very clear in his testimony that this deal, especially for British Columbia and Alberta, would “inject 'a new and substantial source of competition'”.

Competition usually means to me that we're going to see some type of price decrease because there are going to be more players in the market. We didn't see that. Now we're seeing that anyone who has a Rogers cellphone that's not on contract will see their monthly bill go up. I think that's contrary to the testimony that Mr. Staffieri shared with our committee. He outlined two principal ways that this deal was going to be good. The second one that he outlined was that Rogers would “become a stronger, more formidable wireline competitor in western Canada.“ He outlined that “Rogers' cable footprint” would expand to other parts of western Canada that it doesn't actually reach right now. He outlined that there would be a $6.5-billion investment to improve connectivity in the very remote and rural indigenous communities that I represent.

If his first major action since this deal was approved is to increase prices, I've lost a lot of faith in what Rogers is actually telling consumers, what it's telling us as parliamentarians and what it's telling Canadians about its role in addressing the affordability crisis that all of us know is impacting the people we represent.

I do, obviously, support this motion because Canadians want to know that we're doing everything in our legislative power—that's why we called this meeting—to address the things that they're staying up late at night about, such as how they're going to pay their bills right now. Canadians can't pay their bills. We have to fight for Canadians, so we can hold this meeting and we can hold Rogers' Mr. Staffieri to account about what he shared with us last year, especially as it relates to British Columbia and Alberta, where he said that there would be more competition because of this deal.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you, MP Vis.

Mr. Lemire, the floor is yours.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon, everyone. I would like to wish you all a happy new year.

I want to congratulate Mr. Turnbull and his family.

I would also like to express my condolences to Mr. Masse, the New Democrat Party family and all politicians for the passing of Mr. Broadbent.

I find it worthwhile to discuss telecommunications. The committee members know that I've been very interested in and passionate about this issue for the four years that I've been here.

During the previous parliament, I moved a motion to address the issue of high‑speed Internet and the cellular network. This was done in connection with COVID‑19.

As you know, I also tabled a motion on this topic in September. It was adopted by the committee on September 26.

At this time, I would like the chair or the clerk to clarify the procedure for proposing an amendment to Mr. Perkins' motion, in order to include the full text of my motion and thereby broaden its scope.

I think that Canadians and Quebeckers are expecting an update on the telecommunications situation. I gather that people in the industry have much to say. A great deal of information must be verified. There have been developments and setbacks when it comes to mobile virtual network operators, or MVNOs. The CRTC held hearings on this matter in 2017 and 2019 if I'm not mistaken. Some updates are in order. I think that we're ready for an in‑depth study.

We all agree that our committee's priority is obviously Bill C‑27. That said, I'm ready to do my part to address this issue in conjunction with our study of Bill C‑27. The official meetings of the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology will still focus on Bill C‑27 until the bill is passed. However, more meetings can be added. I think that we must look at this issue. People are certainly interested in this topic. We must carry out a real study.

Here in Abitibi‑Témiscamingue, network access and cellular network quality pose challenges. I think that some of my rural colleagues, such as Mr. Vis, would agree that this is also true in their areas. For a long time now, I've been calling on the federal government to set up a program to build cell towers so that every individual across the country can access the cellular network.

It's certainly a matter of economic development. It's certainly also a matter of public safety, quality of life and land use. In 2024, this issue should be resolved. There's also the issue of resilience in the face of climate change.

Is the industry still as viable as it once was? What about competition? In the recent spectrum auctions, companies made major investments, amounting to $2.2 billion. These auctions revealed a long‑awaited fourth player, Vidéotron, which invested between $200 million and $250 million in spectrum licenses.

My proposed amendment would involve adopting the content of the motion passed on September 26, in order to carry out a proper study.

My motion called for six meetings. Given the current situation, we could be looking at a 12‑hour or even a 16‑hour study.

The witnesses proposed in the Conservative motion seem appropriate. They include Commissioner Boswell; the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, Mr. Champagne; the deputy minister, Mr. Kennedy; and the CEOs of the major telecommunications companies.

I'm also thinking of the people whom we've heard from in various studies, such as the representatives of OpenMedia. Yesterday, I was in the municipality of Kipawa, in my constituency. I met with people who described the issue involving the lack of a cellular network for a number of individuals. They would like to have their voices heard as part of this type of study.

I think that we're ready to update our approach.

Mr. Chair, do you need me to reread the motion adopted by our committee, in order to proceed with an amendment?

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Mr. Lemire, I want to clarify the procedure.

The motion that you referred to was moved and adopted by the committee on September 26. If you want to move an amendment to replace the current motion with the September motion, I don't think that you can do so from a procedural standpoint. We would first need to vote on the current motion. You could then reintroduce the September 26 motion.

Otherwise, you must move an amendment that would clarify the motion currently under consideration by the committee.

That's the correct procedure. I don't know what you want to do with this information.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

If this approach seems easier, then that's what I propose to do. It would be tedious for everyone to work through the text of the motion in this way.

I move that we reject the Conservative motion and prioritize the motion adopted by the committee on September 26, so that we can consider the issue in conjunction with the study of Bill C‑27. We could then take steps as soon as possible, and perhaps even now, to invite witnesses and really conduct an in‑depth study of the telecommunications situation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you, Mr. Lemire.

Mr. Gourde, you have the floor.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lévis—Lotbinière, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm pleased to be joining the committee today, in the place of my colleague, Bernard Généreux, who was unable to attend.

It came as no great surprise to learn recently, through the Journal de Québec, that Rogers was announcing rate increases for cellular packages as early as next week, on January 17. I then remembered all the work done last spring. I was among those who had concerns about certain players in the field. A merger leads to competitiveness issues. When fewer companies provide services to Canadians, rates inevitably rise.

The government promised us with great fanfare, at a press conference held by Minister Champagne, that Canadians wouldn't see rate increases. I would like to quote the minister's own noteworthy and convincing words regarding the decision to allow the merger of Rogers and Shaw:

If Canadians do not begin to see a clear and meaningful reduction in prices within a reasonable amount of time as a result of this decision, I will have no choice but to use further legislative and regulatory powers to drive down prices. And I must emphasize that we aren't ruling anything out.

The Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry made a strong statement on behalf of the government. He promised that there wouldn't be any price increases as a result of the merger. The minister undoubtedly held discussions with the companies in this industry—Rogers, Shaw and Québecor—to establish that, for the merger to gain acceptance, there wouldn't be any price increases. Today, we can see that this is totally untrue. A mere eight or nine months after the merger, rate hikes have already been announced for Canadians.

As you know, these are challenging times for Canadians. All costs are skyrocketing, and families with more modest incomes are feeling the pinch. These days, almost everyone has a cellphone, so this issue is really significant. The rate increase affects the wallets of over 80% of Canadians.

I'll join my Conservative colleagues in supporting the motion. I think that it's worth bringing back the key industry players and the minister so that he can explain how he'll respond to the industry's decision to raise rates. He promised all Canadians that the merger was a good thing and that it would even lower costs. We're still waiting for that to happen. We're far from seeing a decrease. Instead, an increase in costs has just been announced.

I don't want to go on and on about this matter. I'll support the motion. I hope that the whole committee will agree to move forward. I think that Canadians have been shortchanged. They deserve to have their questions answered and to know how the government will ensure that rates are reduced.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you, Mr. Gourde.

Mr. Masse, you have the floor.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to my colleagues for their condolences for the Broadbent family.

Of course, Mr. Turnbull, congratulations. It's an exciting time for you and your family. I wish you all the best. Having a holiday baby as well will be even more fun.

I have similar concerns about the industry, and they go back for a long period of time. I also have concerns about the process here.

I looked at Mr. Lemire's motion, and this is like a subset of that motion. Quite frankly, I thought it might not even be in order in some respects, because Mr. Lemire's motion would carry a lot of these elements forward. In fact, it gave some latitude for this. I know that this issue in particular that has been brought forth—and I appreciate it—is fairly specific to Rogers, but it also affects customers of Bell and Telus. Why we throw them under the bus by not including them is something I have a concern about as well.

When you look at the telco policy and how we've arrived at the most recent decisions of the minister, they actually go back to the foundations of deregulation in this country.

When I received my posting in Ottawa, it was during the time when John Manley and Brian Tobin were starting to work on this issue, and they had the deregulation through the Mulroney years. We then had Allan Rock, who put through a process for removing foreign direct investment. He was the first minister I went through. Lucienne Robillard was after that. We then had David Emerson, who was a Liberal and later on a Conservative, going back-and-forth with his policies.

We then had Maxime Bernier, who had a lot of changes during his time in the Harper administration. I would certainly want him as a witness at this hearing, because it would help find the foundation of some of the problems we're faced with right now. We then had the late Jim Prentice, who was a terrific man. He was the industry minister briefly. He was followed by Tony Clement, who might also be an interesting person to bring to this committee because of the policy changes that took place under his tenure.

There was Mr. Christian Paradis, who moved the process that.... When you look at the Harper government, they talked about a “first in telecommunications” plan in terms of advocacy for consumers. We then had James Moore. Minister Moore was here for a while. Again, he talked about innovation and changes. We then had Mr. Bains, who is referenced in the motion, and finally, our current minister.

It's no accident that Canada has had some of the highest prices in the industry and that some of the most abusive practices have taken place. This smaller chapter of those abuses is important, but I think we need to remind ourselves of some that have taken place over the years.

I remember that one of the first ones I dealt with was Bell Canada not giving pay equity to the women in Bell Canada. That was one of the first meetings we had in Ottawa. The CEO at the time, who is now hired by the Liberals, had to be dragged before our industry committee about that issue. We fought to finally get equal rights for women workers at Bell.

Part of this industry has also had a culture in the workplace that's been very disturbing for decades.

We also had the deferral accounts. For those who don't know about the deferral accounts or don't remember them, basically, there was an overcharge by the major corporations—except for SaskTel. SaskTel was actually the only one that didn't charge. In fact, at Bell it was over $80, and it tried to keep those millions of dollars, even after it was awarded that it had to go through the court system. They had to fight to get the persons with disabilities who were awarded money some of those things. We had deferral accounts. That was another thing.

We had unlocking cellphones, which was a big challenge. I actually give Rogers credit for that, because we worked on that and it was the first one to unlock its cellphones. That was an interesting campaign that was done.

We still have issues right now with the right to repair. We have cellphone abuse in the industry for the aftermarket, whether it's fixing your screen or electronic waste with different [Technical difficulty—Editor]. It's nothing related to intellectual property and so forth, but you have consumers with the short end of the stick compared to other countries because we don't have the proper consumer supports for that.

We have foreign direct investment, which was supposed to be the panacea of opening up the industry. I know I mentioned earlier Maxime Bernier and the addition of foreign entrants into the market, which were later allowed by government policy to be bought up and absorbed into the system. Now we have even less competition.

That's the example we have right now. We have—and I predicted it at that time—the cannibalization of Shaw by our own domestic industry as the natural course of action that's going to take place. Actually, there are probably going to be further mergers in the industry that could possibly reduce more customers'....

We have had massive public subsidies in regard to this over the years to try to incentivize them to go into the markets in rural and other areas. Mr. Lemire has mentioned that.

This committee actually had a study on that specifically, the recommendations from which have not been followed by successive Conservative and Liberal governments. We should probably inventory all of those actual issues to see which have been followed up on and which haven't, because they actually correlate to some of the things that we have in the study right here. That's something we actually did. We tabled that and did a press conference. It was supported unanimously by all parties at the time. At the time, Mr. St. Denis was the Liberal chair. He led the committee on a unanimous report on rural broadband services. That's been buried as well.

Most recently—and we don't want to forget about this—the industry is more interested in its own fight than in the interests of Canadians and public safety, as we saw when we had the 911 debacle. Let's not forget about that. They put their interests about each other in front of that. The minister had to call in when he was overseas to get them to be accountable for that.

At the same time we've had this, we've had government policies over the years and what they've done is actually lower corporate taxes on these entrants and on these iconic organizations. That hasn't always led to investment. It hasn't led to new competition. It's led to the bleeding of the public purse. It's also led to a policy of spectrum auction—on which I have been advocating for a change for years—from which over $22 billion has been taken into the public purse by successive Conservative and Liberal governments, back and forth, back and forth. That cost has then been passed onto Canadian consumers in the form of high prices so they can try to get that money back.

The public spectrum is a public asset. It's the same as our air. It's the same as our water. It's the same as our land. That $22 billion has gone up in smoke, and at the same time it has given the excuse for the entrants to have their feuds over towers and their feuds over spectrum. There is actually even a system put in place whereby you can buy and resell spectrum basically as a niche business in the actual industry. We still haven't changed that fully, especially as we're moving to 5G.

What else do we expect is going to happen when we pass that bill on to Canadians?

I can't accept the motion as it is written right now because it's not fulsome enough. Again, I think it partly reflects the intent of Mr. Lemire's motion. It's something we should be looking towards. We've had the issue of a digital bill of rights. Issues of privacy have come up. We have had a series of motions for Canadians. Pricing is of course the number one thing that's on people's minds right now. This motion is devoid of the fact that the cellphone industry and the technology behind it are a benefit of the public use of the airwaves. On top of that, it's now an essential service. We need to do more now than ever before.

If COVID taught us anything, it is that being included in society and the cost of that are associated with and related to your mobile device. Whether you're actually trying to attend school, to communicate with friends, family or relatives, to get a job or to stay in touch with the world during a 911 emergency, it's now an essential service that requires more examination.

Some of the things in the motion here are quite correct and they are very important to look at. I appreciate them. I would hate to leave out organizations that have known and bled this for years. We have the Public Interest Advocacy Centre. We have OpenMedia. We have Professor Vass Bednar. We have Robin Shaban. We have the Consumers' Association of Canada. We have CARP. We have all those groups and organizations that, I'm sure, would want to get in on this and would want to have some more fulsome discussions about it.

I'm open to looking at the issue for sure. I would like a further analysis, though, and I would like to hear from colleagues about Mr. Lemire's motion and whether or not this is really in order. It's very specific but is a subset of what Mr. Lemire was trying to get at. It's at least worth talking about, because we have passed that. Most importantly, I don't want to leave the other customers of Bell, Telus and others basically to the wind because we didn't decide to do the proper thing and look at the industry properly. I have just detailed the bare bones of what has taken place over 20 years.

We're here for a reason, and this specific case is here for a reason, but even if we were able to fix this specific case, it's such a small part of the entire story that it really won't give the relief that's necessary or the justice that we could do.

I also want to make sure that this won't be shopped around to other committees at the House of Commons. That's been the practice recently. Industry stuff has been shopped around to other committees and to other places. It's caused confusion and it's caused issues. If we're going to do this, let's do it right. Let's not leave this to be tabled at some other committee for it to do the proper job that we should be doing here. Again, this is one of the reasons I support Mr. Lemire's motion. We've been doing our best to get Bill C-27 through things and to focus on prioritizing that. We've also entertained other things, but if we're just going to look at this one minuscule issue for an industry that really is titanic, in many respects, with Canadian consumers....

It's certainly one that could have been a source of national pride. It's also one that has a public interest side more than ever before. Again, we own the spectrum. We also give up land rights for some of the infrastructure that takes place for this industry to run, yet we then cast ourselves to the wind. At the same time, successive governments have collected billions of dollars from Canadians and off of the spectrum auction, and then passed it on to them in their bills at the end of the day. There's another storm coming on that unless we change ourselves.

I'm open to looking at this. I'm open to doing some work on this. I want it to be a fulsome thing. Again, I don't want to look at just one niche part of it. It's a very important part, and I'm pleased that the motion has come forward with some description towards it, but I think it's a subset of all the things we need to get at. Time is running out. Our spectrum is going to go more out to auction in the future, and there still is a lack of consumer accountability. This is just one perfect example among many of why there needs to be an overhaul of the basically archaic system that we have.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Before I turn it to MP Ferreri, perhaps I can answer your question, Mr. Masse.

Given that the motion aims to respond to a specific set of circumstances that are a little different from the motion we adopted on September 26, I think it's receivable. It is in order. However, there's one proposition that's on the table right now. It's up to the committee to decide what it wants to adopt. If it wants to build on a motion that was previously adopted by the committee, it can so decide. We will first debate this motion, but then we'll see where it lands. It is a possibility.

Go ahead, Ms. Ferreri.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to everybody. It sounds like there is definitely an effort here to row in one direction in terms of helping Canadians, which I like to see. I can't see how this motion wouldn't get unanimous consent to pass, because I think you've all explained that you care about Canadians.

I want to bring it back to the core of what we're trying to do with this motion—to bring emergency meetings to the industry committee to help Canadians have more affordable cellphone bills—as brought forth by my colleague MP Perkins. I will let him talk further about what that looks like to, sort of, find the ground on which we can all move forward with this.

I want to point out that Minister Champagne on Tuesday urged carriers to “seriously consider customers over profits at this time”, when the announcement was that Bell and Rogers cellphone prices were going to increase. He went on to say, “While prices for some wireless plans have declined by more than 22 per cent over the past year, the planned price increases to certain month-to-month plans that have recently been announced go against the spirit we've set, at a time when Canadians are struggling to make ends meet”. He went on to say, “I am prepared to use any other tools at my disposal to fight for Canadian consumers.” That's what this committee is. It is the tool to fight for Canadian consumers. It is an urgency, as I stated before, in a cost of living crisis.

Under the motion that has been put forward, I also want to reiterate that, given the fact that the Liberal government approved the decision to make Canada's telecommunications market smaller and less competitive, the Minister of Industry must answer for this latest price increase—which he said. He is quoted here as saying that he will use any “tools” necessary.

There is an urgency to this. This goes against.... Again, there's the same quote about “reasonable” time. I just think that focusing on that, and on the motion and what we're trying to do, this has an urgency to it.

I wanted to also just put on the record, as I spoke about earlier, that some folks wrote in to me. Jen McCarroll pays $300 for two cellphones. These are outrageous numbers. Navine pays $500 for four of them. Cathy pays $250 for two lines. Chiu pays just over $200 a month for three lines. McCarroll's is really important. She pays three cellphone bills so that her grandchildren can call home at any time.

This is really interesting. This gentleman wrote in and said that in Mexico it's 200 pesos, or approximately $16 Canadian, for 31 days unlimited phoning to Canada, U.S. and Mexico. He has unlimited text, unlimited social media and 5.75 gigabytes of data.

Obviously, there's an urgency to this. This impacts everyone, as acknowledged across party lines. Let's come to an agreement here and get this motion passed as soon as possible.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you.

MP Sorbara, the floor is yours.