Broadcasting Procedural Letter Addressed to Nathalie Dorval (Cogeco Communications)

Ottawa, 28 July 2017

File Number: 2017-0520-4

BY EMAIL

Nathalie Dorval
Vice-President, Regulatory Affairs and Copyright
Cogeco Communications
5, Place Ville Marie, Office 1700
Montréal (Québec) H3B 0B3
nathalie.dorval@cogeco.com

RE: Cogeco Part 1 Application, Temporary modification of certain requirements under the Television Service Provider Code – Request for disclosure of information designated as confidential

Dear Mrs Dorval:

Cogeco Communications, in the name of its subsidiary company, Cogeco Connexion (Cogeco) filed an application on 21 June 2017 asking to defer the coming into force of certain regulatory requirements arising from the implementation of the Broadcasting Regulatory Policy CRTC 2016-1 – The Television Service Provider Code (The Code).

When Cogeco filed its reply to a request for information on 19 July 2017, it designated certain information as confidential, pursuant to section 31 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission. Cogeco has invoked the following reasons to justify the designation of this information as confidential:

The disclosure of this confidential information, constantly treated as such, would procure competitors significant information on Cogeco Connexion’s activities that could cause it direct and irreparable harm. [Translation]  

However, the Commission has indicated in paragraph 6, of Bulletin 2010-961 that:

Generic statements such as ‘the release of this information to competitors would result in specific, direct harm to the company’ are not sufficient. Parties must provide sufficient reasons to allow meaningful analysis by the Commission or another party who may wish to request disclosure of the information.

Commission staff considers that the disclosure of most of the information designated as confidential would be in the public interest. Commission staff is of the view that Cogeco has not provided enough specific reasons to establish specific direct harm sufficient to outweigh the public interest that would be served by the disclosure of the information. In particular, Commission staff considers that this information is necessary for other parties to making informed submissions, nor did it explain how the information at issue is of a type listed in the Appendix to Bulletin 2010-961.

Staff is enclosing as confidential Attachment A, a copy of the information deemed confidential in Cogeco’s reply to the Request for Information that identifies the specific information being requested to be disclosed.

A reply to this request is to be filed no later than 2 August 2017.

In order to permit parties to respond to the new information being added to the public record, the deadline for filing interventions will be extended to 16 August 2017 and Cogeco will then have until 28 August 2017 to file their final reply.

Sincerely,

[Original signed by]

Nanao Kachi
Director
Social and Consumer Policy
Consumer Affairs and Strategic Policy 

c.c : Laurence Moreau, Laurence.moreau@crtc.gc.ca
Celia Milay, celia.millay@crtc.gc.ca
Ketty Forest, ketty.forest@cogeco.com
Alysia Lau, alau@piac.ca

Enclosed: Attachment A: Clarifications on information marked as confidential in Cogeco’s reply to the Request for Information. (CONFIDENTIAL)

Attachment A: Clarifications on information marked as confidential in Cogeco’s reply to the Request for Information

Commission staff considers that the release of the information below would be in the public interest as it would facilitate meaningful comments by interested parties.

Staff’s preliminary view is that the information in red does not have a specific rationale to justify why this information should be deemed as confidential under one of the categories outlined in Bulletin 2010-961.

Staff observes that the information highlighted in blue may remain confidential and understands why it should be kept as such.


  1. In its application, Cogeco indicated it confirmed with the Commission on 5 May 2016 that it would adhere to the Code and communicated on 21 November 2016 its intent to comply with the condition of licence requiring compliance with the code as of 1 September 2017. Please explain what caused the delay of the Structuring Project that now requires to extend the compliance date to 31 March 2018?

    « Plusieurs facteurs ont contribué au délai de la mise en œuvre du Projet Structurant. À la date de confirmation mentionnée ci-dessus, Cogeco Connexion n’était pas en mesure de savoir que la mise en place du Projet Structurant serait retardée. Suite à la confirmation de Cogeco Connexion en date du 21 novembre 2016 à l’effet que le titulaire de licence  respectera le Code des fournisseurs de services de télévision, plusieurs situations se sont produites qui ont causées des délais. 

    Continuité des affaires :

    Dans un premier temps, pendant la période du Projet Structurant, les affaires opérationnelles continuent. #[Suggested disclosures provided in confidential version]#.

    Multiples phases : »

Date modified: