Evidence of meeting #62 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 crtc.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Han Dong Liberal Don Valley North, ON
That's great.
How could this bill, if passed, potentially help in your work? Would it make your work easier in terms of getting a resolution?
4:25 p.m.
Assistant Commissioner, Operations and Business Services, Commission for Complaints for Telecom-Television Services
Again, I think it makes it clearer in terms of what the customer could expect, so absolutely that makes our job easier. I would also suggest, though—and I'm not saying anything new, as we've been saying this for many years—that providing that information at the point of sale, before a customer agrees to the contract, is key. Generally for consumers that is the ideal situation, but for consumers who find themselves faced with a bill or a service situation that they didn't anticipate, having speed information or any other parameters of what was promised to them clearly indicated in their agreements is absolutely helpful for us to help resolve those complaints.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Han Dong Liberal Don Valley North, ON
I'm very supportive of the spirit of this bill. At the same time, I'm also surprised that there isn't a regulatory framework that allows you to use regulations, whether the CCTS or the CRTC, just to make those requirements.
4:30 p.m.
Competition Policy and Telecom Strategy Expert, As an Individual
If I may, there is a regulatory framework. Parliament has already provided a regulatory framework. The CRTC has the authority to do this, but they have not done it. For example, in 2019, when they were adopting the Internet Code, they explicitly excluded what this bill is trying to do. They didn't even consider it. They have the authority, but they have been unwilling to do it.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Han Dong Liberal Don Valley North, ON
If the bill passes, would there be any conflict between the regulatory power and the legislative power, in your view?
4:30 p.m.
Competition Policy and Telecom Strategy Expert, As an Individual
No. You're essentially complementing and giving direction and democratic accountability over one element of the regulatory authority that you have provided to the CRTC, but the CRTC has forborne from applying its authority for some reason or another; we don't know why.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Thank you very much, gentlemen.
Mr. Lemire, you now have the floor.
4:30 p.m.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Knight, I would like you to talk about recommendations.
As Mr. Rajabiun mentioned, one potential solution is to make the measures more coercive. That way, companies would be penalized for not providing the services that people paid for.
Do you think that is a potential solution that should be strengthened? Would that be applied through a refund to consumers or a requirement to provide the advertised service?
Is there anything to explore on that front?
4:30 p.m.
Senior Campaigner, OpenMedia
For me, nothing is off the table when it comes to giving recourse to consumers, or giving empowerment, in that sense, to consumers.
I don't think that I am in a position to tell the CRTC what they should be doing with this case that comes in front of them, but I really think it's important for this legislation to put this item in front of the CRTC so they can do their job. They can figure that part out.
That being said, yes, there can absolutely be many mechanisms of enforcement that improve things for consumers and put money back into the pockets of consumers. At the end of the day, this is an affordability issue.
4:30 p.m.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
I think we can agree that companies have the means to get information about the services they provide. That data is readily available to them, but it's not available to the consumer. The consumer is not really aware of what they are actually getting for what they are paying.
Would it be necessary for companies to be more transparent with their consumers by providing this information, so that, as a result, their rates would be better aligned with the services they actually provide?
4:30 p.m.
Senior Campaigner, OpenMedia
Absolutely. Transparency could have a really positive effect on pricing when it comes to the lack of affordability that we see, both in.... We're talking about broadband. If we're talking about telecom in general, people in Canada are still paying to this day some of the highest prices in the world on both cellphone and Internet services, so yes, the more transparent information can be made available to consumers....
This is a positive step for competition. If we're asking providers to compete on actual speeds and service quality, yes, absolutely. This is great for innovation. This is great for competition. In all respects, our parliamentarians should be looking at improving competition. This is one part of that greater conversation. I won't say it will solve the entire competition problem, but yes, it would absolutely have a positive effect.
4:35 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Rajabiun, you had it correct with the CRTC. I don't think it's a coincidence that the minister has finally written a letter that's a bit more pro-consumer than ever before.
I just did a quick search of CRTC press releases, and they're full of all kinds of contradictions that they have done in the past, including slowing down the protection against fraud and robocalls when it gave extensions when a known process could have protected Canadian consumers from fraud.
This is, basically, at the end of the day, as you're saying, just cementing a best practices model. We don't have to wait around on bended knee for either the minister or the CRTC to shake out what people should get when purchasing something with their own money.
4:35 p.m.
Competition Policy and Telecom Strategy Expert, As an Individual
On the question of the fraud calls, I want to correct you on that. One of the problems with the implementation of all of those anti-fraud systems is the false positives they create. It's true that they can stop certain fraudulent calls, but one has to be very careful about not blocking legitimate communications. That is a technical issue. The technology wasn't ready, and the telcos weren't ready for it.
Besides that, on the question of the new policy direction that we see with very good words about consumers and competition, it's important to recognize that this is the second policy direction this government has issued. The first one actually did the exact opposite. It was essentially trying to roll back a lot of the progress that had been made in trying to create a more competitive environment with the CRTC regulations between 2012 and 2016. The government essentially issued a policy direction that forced the regulator to reverse course. It's now reversing course again. That is a key problem with giving policy directions to an independent regulator. You are creating this dynamic inconsistency in a policy.
In my view, the act that Parliament has set out is very clear about its objectives in promoting affordability, quality of service, and universal access. The problem with this policy direction is that it essentially tries to.... At one point, the industry puts a lot of pressure on the government, and the government gives direction to the CRTC to not do too much. You have to be very careful not to get away from the legislative framework you have set out already. That's the key, I think.
4:35 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Essentially, though, if you want this done, do it this way and it's done. If not, we wait around for whenever from the CRTC and just see what happens.
4:35 p.m.
Competition Policy and Telecom Strategy Expert, As an Individual
Well, maybe there will be a cultural change. There was a cultural change that was happening at the CRTC for a few years. Then it was reversed, unfortunately, and that's why we've ended up with the highest prices in the world.
4:35 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
I've been here during the Maxime Bernier years and before that, so I could go on.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
4:35 p.m.
Competition Policy and Telecom Strategy Expert, As an Individual
Maxime Bernier's policy direction was the start of this process. Then the previous government, by the end of their term, realized that this was a mistake and tried to reverse course.
March 20th, 2023 / 4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Brad Vis Conservative Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to our witnesses for a very comprehensive meeting thus far.
In advance of Bill C-288 coming before our committee, a number of the telecommunications companies wrote to my office and stated that MP Mazier's bill is unnecessary and, in their view, unworkable. They cited two key reasons, one being their commitment under the wireless code to communicate with customers in a way that is clear, timely and accurate, and that uses plain language. That's under the wireless code.
The second reason they gave was the Internet Code. They said that under the Internet code, “A service provider must communicate with customers in a way that is clear, easy to understand, timely, accurate, and accessible and that uses plain language.” They also cited some rules under the Competition Act about deceptive advertising and they outlined that the CRTC has conducted two studies about wireline Internet speeds, and the findings by an independent company were that wireline ISPs generally provide the speeds that they advertise.
I'll go to Erin first.
Erin, I'm not going to outline which companies wrote me on this, but would you agree in general? What do you think of the comments I just made? I'll leave it there.
4:40 p.m.
Senior Campaigner, OpenMedia
I feel like I have a great idea of who wrote that to you.
Let me say that I am not in the business of taking big telecom's talking points at face value. Let me be clear about that.
I can say that it's obvious why these monopolized companies don't want a bill that would reveal to customers that average speeds might not live up to the package that they were sold. Either customers will want to downgrade to cheaper plans or the plans would have to more accurately reflect the actual service speed customers are receiving. Both of those things would interfere with big telecom's ability to unfairly profit off Canadians, but—
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Brad Vis Conservative Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC
That's very helpful. Let me interject right there.
According to your expertise, are the wireless code and the Internet Code not sufficient to do what this bill is seeking to do?
4:40 p.m.
Senior Campaigner, OpenMedia
Absolutely not: Without question, current legislation is not sufficient. It's not working.
I would say that big telecom has some flagrant disobedience and some exploitation of loopholes. That's been carefully documented by the CRTC, the federal government and civil society. It's obvious that we need clear, precise and enforceable requirements to hold these companies accountable, and presently it's not happening.