The Federal Court of Appeal did not grant BCE the injunction it requested to suspend a temporary CRTC decision that will allow independent internet service providers to use its fiber optic network in Quebec and Ontario.
The court’s decision was rendered Friday, the day after the announcement of budgetary restrictions at Bell Canada. The company announced it was cutting 4,800 jobs and may further reduce network spending, in part because of directives from the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC).
The Federal Court of Appeal granted Bell’s request for leave to appeal the CRTC’s temporary decision, but rejected the company’s request to stay the decision until the hearing of the case on the merits. According to the court, BCE did not demonstrate that it risked suffering “irreparable harm” while awaiting further proceedings.
In a written statement, Bell spokeswoman Jacqueline Michelis said that “while we are disappointed that the court did not grant our request for a stay to terminate the interim order, we believe the court has made the right decision in granting our request for leave to appeal.
“The CRTC’s interim decision to force Bell to provide access to its networks in Quebec and Ontario is already having a negative impact on the construction of our new fiber network,” she said. The CRTC should prioritize continued investment in networks over network resale, otherwise Canada risks falling behind in the digital economy. »
The company is also awaiting a decision from the federal cabinet, which it has asked to review the regulator’s action.
The CRTC’s decision last November aimed to stimulate competition for internet services in Quebec and Ontario. But the CRTC emphasized at the time that it could possibly make this orientation permanent and apply it to provinces other than Quebec and Ontario, and therefore to other big players in this sector.
This week’s hearing, which is expected to hear from 22 groups, will focus on three main issues, CRTC chair Vicky Eatrides said in her opening remarks. These include how well Canadians are currently served by internet service markets, what changes are needed to ensure a more competitive future, and how the CRTC can provide clarity so that companies “can invest and market more high-quality, innovative services.”
“In recent years, we have seen a decline in competition between internet service providers,” said Mr.me Eatrides.
“Many internet service providers — independent providers — have been bought by big companies and those that remain have fewer subscribers than before. We also know that telecommunications networks are expensive to build, maintain and operate, so unless there is a prospect of return, investors will put their money elsewhere,” she added.
BCE accused the CRTC of having already made its bed in this matter, and believes that the direction of the organization so far had had the consequence of slowing down its momentum to develop its fiber optic network.
The company responded last fall by reducing its network investment plans by 1.1 billion by 2025, including a minimum cut of 500 million this year. BCE also warned that further cost reductions could be made if it considers it necessary to anticipate CRTC decisions that it considers unfavorable.
The opinion of the Competition Bureau
But the Competition Bureau argued Monday during its appearance at the CRTC hearing that effective wholesale access to fiber optics can foster more competition for internet services.
The competition watchdog recommended the CRTC update its wholesale access framework to provide independent operators “access to an increasingly large network while also serving to reduce asymmetry with incumbent competitors with facilities that may distort competition.”
“Competition among Internet service providers is not only about prices and quality of service in the short term, but also about building and improving Internet networks in the long term,” said the Deputy Commissioner of the Bureau of Internet Service. competition, Krista McWhinnie.
John Lawford, executive director of the Public Interest Advocacy Center, urged the CRTC not to succumb to “threats of withdrawal of investment” from large operators.
“ [Le CRTC] is mandated to achieve telecommunications policy objectives, not to return monopoly rent to incumbent operators, Mr Lawford said. Incumbents bully the Council into using their overheated definition of “investment” as a trump card that always wins. You have to tell them “no”. »