Telecom - Commission letter addressed to John Lawford (Counsel to Coalition for Cheaper Wireless Services)
Ottawa, 4 April 2020
Our reference: 1011-NOC2019-0057
Mr. John Lawford
Counsel to Coalition for Cheaper Wireless Services
285 McLeod Street, Suite 200
RE: Review of mobile wireless services, Telecom Notice of Consultation CRTC 2019-57 –Procedural objection regarding certain undertakings
Dear Mr. Lawford:
During its appearance at the public hearing associated with the proceeding initiated by Telecom Notice of Consultation 2019-57, the Coalition for Cheaper Wireless Services (CCWS) raised an objection to the admissibility of a report, entitled “Understanding affordability of consumer mobile wireless services in Canada” prepared by PricewaterhouseCoopers (the PwC Report).
TELUS Communications Inc. (TELUS) had referred to the PwC Report during its appearance earlier in the hearing and had undertaken to file the report on the record at a later date.
During its subsequent appearance at the hearing, CCWS undertook to file a rebuttal of methodology employed by the PwC Report (the rebuttal evidence).
On 10 March 2020, parties filed their responses to undertakings made at the public hearing, including TELUS, which filed the PwC Report, and CCWS, which filed the rebuttal evidence.
At the same time, CCWS renewed its objection to the admissibility of the PwC Report. CCWS argued that the PwC report did not constitute evidence in support of previous submissions and evidence on the record of the proceeding. Accordingly, in CCWS’s view, it would be inconsistent with the Commission’s Rules of ProcedureFootnote1 to admit the PwC Report on the record.
Both the PwC Report and the rebuttal evidence were filed in response to undertakings and both go to the issue of affordability of wireless services, which is an issue within the scope of the proceeding on which numerous parties have made extensive submissions. Further, by filing the rebuttal evidence, CCWS has been provided with an opportunity to comment directly on conclusions reached in the PwC Report. In addition, given the timing of these filings, the CCWS will have an additional opportunity to comment on them in their final submissions should they so choose. Finally, Commission staff considers that the Commission, as a specialist tribunal, is well-position to assess and weigh the evidence before it and has extensive experience doing so.
Accordingly, both the PwC Report, and the rebuttal evidence, will remain on the record of the proceeding.
Original signed by
Director of Policy
- Date modified: