Rogers, Cogeco, Quebecor challenge ILECs at CRTC hearings

Representatives from Cogeco Inc. and Rogers Communications Inc. told the CRTC that Telus Corp.’s proposals for Canada’s wholesale framework are misleading and hypocritical, while Quebecor Inc. took aim at BCE Inc.’s “outrageous” push against the regime. Various stakeholders have been presenting their views on what the future of Canada’s wholesale high-speed access (HSA) framework should look like, as the regulator’s week-long hearing continues. Thursday saw appearances from Rogers, Cogeco, and Quebecor subsidiary Videotron. While they continued to support their initial stances on the regime, each company shared some concerns with cases made the day before by Bell and Telus. “Telus said they are a regional player. That's pretty fanciful, commissioner, and pretty misleading, to be honest,” said Cogeco Connexion president Frédéric Perron in response to the western telecom’s argument that it is not an incumbent “in any major centre east of Alberta.” Telus proposed that ILECs should not be allowed wholesale access to other networks in their own operating region, but that they should be allowed to venture into other ILECs operating zones. This was hit with strong opposition from the other telecoms. “Telus is a national brand, a national wireless service, a national home security service. Which Canadian do you know doesn't know Telus? Telus is not a regional player,” said Perron. Cogeco criticized Telus for claiming it is a new entrant in Ontario and Quebec while simultaneously crediting its flanker brand Koodo for having a big impact because of its national brand. Rogers agreed. “Telus’ proposal is hypocritical, it's self-serving, and it's based on a misleading premise that Telus is this plucky regional carrier that's going to provide competition. That's simply not true,” said the company’s senior VP of regulatory affairs Dean Shaikh. “What Telus is asking you to do, quite frankly, is to position them to everely undermine our ability to invest, by reselling on our networks, when we have no ability to respond as a reseller on any ILEC network,” he said, noting Rogers has a much smaller footprint in the reseller market than Bell and Telus. He argued that this would force Rogers to compete with both ILEC facilities-based players as well as ILEC flanker players. Rogers continued its push for mandated wholesale access to be phased out, or at least for disaggregated access to be maintained, saying the intervention being considered in this proceeding is unjustified. Shaikh argued the commission should instead be focusing its efforts on strengthening network-based competition, such as promoting “fair and efficient access to passive infrastructure.” “We believe there is still a path to a feasible disaggregated solution if the Commission is prepared to work at it and expect more from our wholesale-based competitors,” he said. Although Rogers would prefer disaggregated to remain, it countered Telus’ proposal by calling for equitable exclusions applied among facilities-based carriers. Considering Rogers is prioritizing next-generation upgrades to its hybrid fibre-coaxial (HFC) infrastructure over installing fibre-to-the-premises (FTTP), the company also called for any exclusions to be technology-neutral, applying to companies with HFC or FTTP networks equally. Shaikh recommended the CRTC only mandate access to one high speed technology per provider. Because Rogers is focused on HFC, being forced to provide access to both would be unfair, inefficient, and disproportionate, “given the limited reach of cable FTTP networks.” While Cogeco stood next to Rogers against Telus’ proposals, it maintained its position that the Big Three should be excluded from entering the mandated wholesale access framework with their flanker brands. Perron pointed to the many acquisitions of wholesale providers by the Big Three, which he said has led to almost half of all wholesale customers on Cogeco’s network to belong to Bell, Telus, and Rogers. “This is unprecedented and is a severe distortion of the original intent of the mandated wholesale access regime. And it represents an existential threat to the long-term viability of regional carriers like Cogeco as a going concern,” he said. “The Big Three incumbents are using the wholesale access regime to consolidate their dominance of Canada’s telecommunications industry.” “If we turn the lights on on a new deployment, and the next day, one of the big marketing machines of a Big Three player comes in asking for regulated access, potentially at rates that are under our costs, we could be decimated,” he explained, saying Cogeco risks being crowded out of its own networks. This is not what the wholesale access regime was designed for, said Cogeco’s president and CEO Philippe Jetté. He challenged Telus’ argument on Wednesday that the wholesale mandate is a useless tool for competition if strong competitors cannot use it. “By purchasing all the small , they're making the mandated regime unfunctional,” said Jetté. In response to Cogeco’s arguments, Rogers said its share of the reseller market is much smaller than Bell and Telus’. While their proposals differed for what kinds of exemptions carriers should have in the mandated wholesale HSA regime, Cogeco, Rogers, and Quebecor agreed that cable carriers have had to shoulder much of the burden of the wholesale access regime and that the ILECs have had a long enough regulatory vacation. “We believe it's high time for Bell and Telus to play by the same rules as cable operators across Canada,” said président and CEO of Quebecor, Pierre Karl Péladeau, in French. Peladeau pointed to retail offerings from Bell that it claims are priced at a third of the wholesale rate. He argued that this serves as “irrefutable proof” of Bell’s “exclusionary practices whose sole purpose is to force its competitors to squeeze their profit margins and which are prohibited under Section 78 and 79 of the Competition Act of Canada.” The CEO also criticized Bell’s recent “deplorable initiative” to try and appeal the CRTC’s interim mandate decision. “Bell is doing everything in its power to protect its virtual monopoly on FTTP services and to torpedo the Commission's efforts. Forgive my statement, but this is really outrageous,” he said. Peladeau continued, “we know that they want to maintain their oligopoly. Bell's relentless efforts are infuriating Canadians and its threats to stop investing in its networks are nothing more than a strategy worthy of the sandman.” The CRTC is set to conclude its hearings on Friday, after appearances from the Competitive Operators of Canada, BC Broadband Association, and TekSavvy Solutions Inc. – Reporting by Phalen Tynes-MacDonald at pcreed@thewirereport.ca .

Rogers, Cogeco, Quebecor challenge ILECs at CRTC hearings

News | February 16, 2024

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Rogers, Cogeco, Quebecor challenge ILECs at CRTC hearings

News | February 16, 2024

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Related Stories

NDP critic calls for Rogers to reverse price hikes or be blocked from federal contracts

Cogeco defends infrastructure upgrade amid TekSavvy dispute

Cogeco MVNO operations still a ways away

Corus wants in on local news fund post Rogers-Shaw

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us