Evidence of meeting #32 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was rogers.
A video is available from Parliament.
2:20 p.m.
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
I'll ask Mr. Murray to answer that question.
2:20 p.m.
Director, Dispute Resolution and Regulatory Implementation, Telecommunications, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
I am neither an expert on these matters nor a lawyer. That said, the Telecommunications Act includes powers of inspection. I can't say whether they could be used in a case like this, but it is a possibility. There are several others as well.
As we mentioned earlier, we have just received Rogers' responses and are beginning to study them. Depending on what we find, what the facts are and so on, there will be a lot of discussion about possible next steps.
2:25 p.m.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
What were the lessons from the outage in 2021? Would anything have prevented what happened in 2022?
Could we have learned from the events in 2021?
Could more have been done to avoid what happened a few days ago?
2:25 p.m.
Director, Dispute Resolution and Regulatory Implementation, Telecommunications, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
As we said earlier, the 2021 outage was a different event. The circumstances were not the same. It impacted the cellular network. For the most part, customers were still able to access 911 services. So the circumstances were different.
We sent Rogers questions as part of our request on July 12. We have just received the answers. It will be possible for us to ask more questions to ensure that we fully understand the differences between both situations and to see what could be done to keep improving so that an event like this does not happen again.
2:25 p.m.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Among the solutions put forward, there was talk of being able to rely on Rogers' competitors, who could somehow take over in such a situation.
Do you think it is appropriate to rely on competitors to provide service continuity, since there may be a lack of investment in some areas?
A proposal like this one could lead some to level down. Indeed, even if their investments are insufficient, competitors could save the day in the event of an outage.
2:25 p.m.
Director, Dispute Resolution and Regulatory Implementation, Telecommunications, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
All those issues will need to be considered.
Obviously, when dealing with a situation like the one on July 8, any and all solutions are worth trying. That means considering their advantages and disadvantages. We also have to determine how to decrease disadvantages and increase advantages for Canadians.
2:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Michael Kram
Thank you, Monsieur Lemire.
Next, from the NDP, we have Brian Masse for six minutes.
2:25 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to the witnesses for being here today.
Mr. Scott, will you open up an inquiry under section 48 of the Telecommunications Act to look at making sure there's a guarantee of basic service levels, compensation, resiliency and redundancy, especially on the emergency response aspect? Will you do that?
2:25 p.m.
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
Thank you, Mr. Masse.
We will be looking at a number of possibilities. I can't say what they will be yet. As I said, the first step is to examine and satisfy ourselves about the completeness of the responses working through ESWG, and then the commission will make a determination as to the next steps.
2:25 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Here's a current scorecard and this is what I think I find frustrating with regard to what's taking place here.
You have a failure by Rogers in the system affecting not only just the economy but also, critically, 911. That falls under the responsibility of the minister and also our regulatory bodies because, whatever anybody wants to say about it, we allowed a provider to provide service that wasn't complete, and they weren't willing to invest in it because it wasn't the technology that was the problem.
Now what's going to happen is.... The minister has been meeting privately with the CEOs of an industry that's notorious for fighting amongst themselves and also uses unscrupulous practices with consumers, as the Competition Bureau has shown. Now we have a regulator, being the CRTC—and no disrespect, Mr. Scott, you're a former Telus executive—and we're not going to see all the documents. You admitted already that there are going to be redactions on those things.
How is the public to have any confidence whatsoever in this process? If it's not the minister's responsibility for this, then is it the CRTC's, or do you not have the proper legislation? This should not happen. It's as simple as that. Whose fault is it at the end of the day, and how can the public's confidence be restored when we have all of this insider stuff being set up for the solutions? There won't even be a public inquiry about it.
2:25 p.m.
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
There are a lot of elements to that question, but I will say this.
Number one, you asked whose fault it is, and the answer is Rogers. You asked me—
2:25 p.m.
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
They operate the network, and they are responsible. They are, and they have taken responsibility for the outage.
Our responsibility will be to investigate thoroughly. We do so in a public manner through public proceedings. The only information that will be kept confidential is that which is either harmful for competitive reasons or harmful because it could provide a tool kit for those who would exploit weaknesses in the networks.
2:30 p.m.
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
We have barely begun our examination. I can't reach a conclusion before we have evidence.
2:30 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
What could be the result then? Is it going to be financial? Will it be anything criminal? What will be the consequences? People couldn't get through to 911 or had other problems that we don't even know right now. Who is going to prescribe those penalties? People want to know.
2:30 p.m.
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
First of all, whether or not penalties are required is a matter still to be determined. We have a number of tools at our disposal, the most obvious of which is administrative monetary penalties, but they are used to encourage compliance. They are not meant or designed to be punitive, which is made clear in the legislation. Obviously, we do not have jurisdiction over criminal matters.
2:30 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Exactly, so here we are again with basically a minister making up stuff in terms of what they can do at the time. He doesn't even get a phone call about the situation, and you didn't get a phone call about the situation. We have a situation where our legislation doesn't even provide for any type of real culpability at the end of the day anyway.
Again, you have a power that you could exercise now instead of fooling around with this, and we can get some information which you may or may not provide to the public. You've already said that some of it might be redacted, so you're going to decide what those are. How does the public even know that? What's the oversight for you at the end of the day, just Parliament?
2:30 p.m.
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
I think that's a very significant oversight, but, yes, we are accountable to Parliament.
I would take issue with your characterization of the public's not knowing. Not only are the claims of confidentiality subject to applications by the public, but they are a matter of public record.
The information can be sought, and Rogers will have to persuade the commission of the need to keep it confidential. The commitment that I did make was that all the information Canadians need to understand how this happened and what is being done to lessen the possibility of anything happening in the future will be communicated in a fulsome way to Canadians.
2:30 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
How are you going to be available...or I guess, what powers do you have in the personal conversations that Rogers and others will have with the minister and all those meetings and then other subsequent meetings that might take place? Who can be in as a carrier given this and who cannot? Who is going to decide who is even going to be in as the carriers for these things? How are you going to get access to those meetings? Do you have access to all those meetings between the minister and the different organizations?
2:30 p.m.
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
My understanding is that the matters the minister has raised are being assigned to ESWG. ESWG is a committee made up of ISED representatives and industry technical representatives. I have been assured that we will be invited to participate at the ESWG.
2:30 p.m.
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
Are all of the matters at ESWG public? No, because they relate to technical issues that, if they were completely public, would create a tool kit for those who have nefarious intentions. There is certain information that needs to be protected, Mr. Masse.