‘No rule has ever been broken:’ CRTC chairman Ian Scott says meeting with Bell manager was a drink with a friend

Ian Scott says he simply drank a beer with a friend. His critics see it differently.

The powerful chairman of the Canadian Radio Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) has been under siege for months from vocal critics who want him fired because he was allegedly too cozy with the major players in the industry he is supposed to regulate.

“The simple answer is that nothing inappropriate has been done,” Scott said in an exclusive interview with the Star in his first public comment on the issue.

Scott was a target of criticism in the wake of a CRTC decision in August of 2019 that found that wholesale rates were too high and needed to be lowered.

This initially led to much cheering by consumer advocacy groups who have long complained that internet affordability in Canada is excessively high compared to other parts of the world.

But after an appeal by Canada’s major telecommunications companies, the regulator made a sudden U-turn and reversed its decision on lower tariffs last year. This has led to accusations of CRTC favoritism.

A hotspot for critics was a meeting in December 2019 at an Ottawa bar between Scott and Bell Media’s CEO, Mirko Bibic, who was the chief operating officer at the time. Critics said the CRTC was unnecessarily influenced by the big players over smaller internet service providers, to the detriment of more affordable rates for Canadians.

“I went for a beer with someone I have known for many years”. And it finally chose that he chose to address a broadcasting issue a bit of what Bell could do in the future, ”says Scott in the wide, almost hour-long interview.

The CRTC chairman says the meeting between the two executives initially had nothing to do with business.

“However, because we were talking about business, he (Bibic) recorded it properly as required by the lobbyist registration,” Scott says. “It was left in my agenda and in my agenda. I did not hide the fact that it took place. “

Competitors, including smaller ISPs that often offer cheaper prices, such as TekSavvy Solutions Inc., have called for Scott to be fired. They pointed out that he was once a lobbyist for Telus Communications Inc.

“At no time did I have a conversation with Bell about a file I have in front of us. I do not. I have never. And I never will, ”says Scott. “No rule has ever been broken.”

However, even Konrad von Finckenstein, the former chair of the CRTC, told the Star’s Christine Dobby that he was shocked that the commission could turn around so abruptly with the reduction of tariffs.

“I was amazed at this decision.”

An analysis done by Dobby shows that since the original decision on lower wholesale tariffs, large telecommunications have had significantly more access to government and the CRTC than smaller players in the industry, which is 250 times for the big players verses 19 for smaller met independent competitors during that time frame.

In the wake of the Internet wholesale tariff decision, Michael Geist, professor at the University of Ottawa, who holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and e-commerce law, blamed Scott for “presiding over the dismantling of a pro-consumer, pro- innovative approach “at the CRTC.

But Scott says the characterization by his critics that he is too close to major telecommunications since he previously worked for Telus is merely a “smear” campaign.

“I had several requests to tell my side of the story. And I did not talk about it. I took the big road and tried not to make it worthy… But actually it’s been 14 years since I worked for Telus. And after that I worked for another company (Telesat) for nine years, which most people do not hear about. ”

The CRTC CEO said the system finally worked when the final wholesale tariffs were announced. And that he ended up being just one of nine votes on the regulatory panel.

“I have no additional voting powers as chairman. We have a process that allows parties who believe we have made a mistake to apply for a review. That’s what happened. They said we were wrong. We went back and redone our analysis and we found errors. We corrected the errors, which led to different rates. “

The May 2021 ruling, which is being appealed, means that the smaller independent service providers must retroactively repay $ 325 million in payments to the major telephone and cable companies for access to their networks.

The big Telco’s argued that the tariffs were so low that it would dampen network infrastructure investments. Both the Federal Court of Appeal and the federal cabinet refused to reverse the CRTC decision and throw the decision back to the regulator. But that’s not the final word yet. A decision by the federal court last September paved the way for an appeal against the ruling by TekSavvy.

“I fully recognize that these rates are challenging for competitors,” says Scott. “But we did what should have been done.”

As a regulator, Scott has a huge influence not only on what Canadians pay for Internet services, but also on what they will eventually see on their television screens. His decisions today will affect Canadians for a generation, as telecommunications is not the only hot-button industry that Scott oversees.

The chairman is likely to be tasked with new comprehensive regulatory powers when the liberal government is expected to reload a version of Bill-C10, a law to amend the Broadcasting Act. Liberal government leader Mark Holland told reporters on Monday that it “will be presented very soon.”

The legislation was notified overnight, meaning it could be tabled as early as Wednesday.

“We need reform of the broadcasting law,” Scott said of the bill. “The world has changed.”

While the CRTC is responsible for outdated broadcasters like Global, and City, CTV and the public broadcaster the CBC, it currently has no jurisdiction over dominant internet players like Netfix and Amazon. The updates to the law are expected to change that and allow foreign streamers to contribute to Canadian content.

The last major reform of the law was more than three decades ago, before the internet became widely available.

The CRTC is likely to have enforcement powers, such as the ability to refine streaming services, as well as have a say in the discoverability of Canadian television and film on their platforms.

But some critics were outspoken in their fears that the CRTC would be given too much power to determine what Canadians were looking at. The Conservatives have already expressed their opposition to the law being reinstated, calling it “deeply flawed.”

But Scott says the CRTC is not choosing programs that Canadians are watching.

“We are not interested in choosing programs. You can choose to watch what you want. Our role is to make sure there is a Canadian selection and Canadian stories are available to be written and produced and distributed. ”

Scott says fears that the CRTC will have too much regulatory power are misleading and that there are already guidelines in place to ensure that the CRTC does not override through public hearings.

“The way in which the framework is developed is through public proceedings. We do not write it on the back of a napkin in a dark room. We have a full range of stakeholders. They will help develop a public record. And on that record we base our future regulatory model. We do not make decisions based on personal preferences. ”

One big issue is whether the CRTC will eventually have jurisdiction over Canadian user-generated content posted on sites like YouTube or TikTok.

“It’s kind of nonsense. There are a lot of great players to look at. We definitely do not have to go and watch Tik Tok videos, ”says Scott. “We will never regulate user-generated content. We are not interested in that. “

Trade unions and the arts sector at least agree that online platforms should also contribute to Canadian production. How they do this will eventually have to be figured out by Scott and the CRTC through consultations.

Currently, Canadian broadcasters must invest five percent of their revenue in the Canadian Media Fund, which supports Canadian productions. There is no such provision for streaming services. But that is expected to change with Bill C-10.

Still, Scott says he does not see a one-size-fits-all approach to ensuring the streamers contribute to Canadian culture.

“If you have significant economic benefit, you have to contribute,” Scott says. “But I think you will oversimplify by saying that everyone should be charged a certain percentage. I do not think this is the appropriate regime. We need to develop a framework that makes sense. And that is exactly why we are here. ”