ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter Addressed to Various Parties

This page has been archived on the Web

Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. Archived Decisions, Notices and Orders (DNOs) remain in effect except to the extent they are amended or reversed by the Commission, a court, or the government. The text of archived information has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Changes to DNOs are published as “dashes” to the original DNO number. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats by contacting us.

Ottawa, 22 November 2018

Our reference: 1011-NOC2018-0422


Mr. John Lawford
Executive Director and General Counsel
Public Interest Advocacy Centre,

Mr. Frank Folino
Canadian Association of the Deaf-Association des Sourds du Canada et al.

Ms. Jill Schatz
Executive Director
Canadian Network Operators Consortium,

Mr. Mark Nanni et al.

Mr. Stephen Schmidt
Vice-President – Telecom Policy & Chief Regulatory Legal Counsel
TELUS Communications Inc.

Re: Proceeding to establish a mandatory code for Internet services - Procedural Requests

Dear Madam or Sir:

On 9 November 2018, the CRTC published Call for comments – Proceeding to establish a mandatory code for Internet services, Telecom Notice of Consultation CRTC 2018-422 (the Notice).

The Notice sets out the following schedule:

19 December 2018 - Deadline to submit initial comments

28 January 2019 - Deadline to submit reply comments

21 March 2019 - Deadline to submit responses to requests for information (RFIs), which the Commission may ask of any party to the proceeding.

8 April 2019 - Deadline to submit final submissions

On 10 November 2018, the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) submitted a procedural request in which it asked that the Commission:

The Forum for Research and Policy in Communications (FRPC), Union des consommateurs (UC), the Canadian Network Operators Consortium (CNOC), the Canadian Association of the Deaf-Association des Sourds du Canada et al.Footnote2 (CAD-ASC et al.), Marc Nanni, Kelly McNamara, David William Hadcock (Mark Nanni et al.), and the Manitoba Branch of the Consumers' Association of Canada (CAC Manitoba) supported PIAC’s request, in letters dated 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 21 November 2018, respectively. Telus Communications Inc. (Telus), in its letter dated 16 November 2018, opposed PIAC’s request for an oral hearing.

In their submissions, CNOC, CAD-ASC et al. and Telus proposed alternative schedules for the proceeding.

First, with respect to PIAC’s request to hold an oral hearing, the Commission is of the view that the written process set out in the Notice will provide a sufficient opportunity for interested persons to make submissions and for a complete record to be established with respect to the matters set out in the Notice. The Commission notes that the Television Service Provider Code (2016) was developed through a paper proceeding.

Second, with respect to PIAC and CNOC’s requests that the deadline for initial submissions be moved to a date after the publication of the Commission’s upcoming report on misleading and aggressive sales practices, the Commission notes that in paragraph 2 of the Notice, it indicated that the two proceedings are separate and that it is not in the public interest to delay a proceeding on the possible establishment of an Internet Code.

With respect to PIAC’s arguments that the deadlines should be adjusted to allow all parties more time to develop positions and commission research prior to filing initial submissions, the Commission is not convinced that the current schedule, which allows 40 days before initial submissions are due, does not provide sufficient time for all parties to make their initial comments.

With respect to Telus’ proposal to change the order of submissions to permit parties to respond to RFIs before initial submissions are filed, the Commission notes that the order of submissions set out in the proceeding was deliberately chosen to allow the Commission to efficiently and effectively complete the record of this proceeding.

While the Commission is of the view that the schedule and order of submissions should remain as set out in the Notice, the Commission considers that CAD-ASC et al. has demonstrated that it requires a party-specific adjustment to the deadlines set out in the Notice to prepare, conduct and submit the results of its proposed survey. The Commission notes that, in its letter, CAD-ASC et al. proposed to submit the survey results on 7 March 2019. The Commission accepts the proposed timeline for submissions of CAD-ASC’s survey.

Finally, with respect to PIAC’s concerns relating to the issuance of RFIs, the Commission clarifies that no RFIs have been sent to date. Consistent with the order of deadlines set out in the Notice, Commission RFIs would be based on the evidence submitted in initial and reply comment phases and, thus, sent after the reply phase which closes on 28 January 2019.

In light of the above, the Commission determines that:

Yours sincerely,

Claude Doucet
Secretary General


Ms. Monica L. Auer
Executive Director
Forum for Research and Policy in Communications,

Ms. Katrine Dilay
Manitoba Branch of the Consumers' Association of Canada

Ms. Anaïs Beaulieu-Laporte
Analyste politiques et réglementation
Union des consommateurs,

Distribution list

Date modified: