Opinion: Healthy competition in mobile wireless market benefits public

Article content

On Tuesday, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) opened a hearing on mobile wireless services. It is the most far-reaching review of the wireless industry since 2007, when the federal government decided to make it easier for new players to enter the mobile market. Whatever one may think of the Harper government of the time, it cannot be denied that the measures to promote competition in wireless services introduced by the late Jim Prentice, then-minister of Industry and subsequently premier of Alberta, disrupted the mobile cartel, ʺThe Big 3,ʺ controlled by Bell, Telus and Rogers. In Quebec, they paved the way for real competition from Québecor and Vidéotron.

At the time, the federal government listened to our arguments and made the wise decision to set aside spectrum for new market entrants.

In Quebec, the impact has been indisputable and the resulting competition has delivered multiple benefits. Vidéotron began rolling out its own network in 2008, which shook up the market at the time and continues to help shape the wireless landscape in Quebec to this day. Vidéotron invested more than $2 billion in its network and created thousands of good jobs that benefited Quebec’s economy. Since it entered the market, prices for mobile plans have dropped more sharply in Quebec than anywhere else in Canada. In 10 years, Vidéotron has risen to the top of several rankings of network quality and customer service. This is a concrete example of what facilities-based competition can do. Not to mention the billions of dollars the federal government has collected in the spectrum auctions. There is every reason for the CRTC to continue supporting the facilities-based competitive model.

Some try to deny the evidence, but the Competition Bureau of Canada has found that the presence of a strong fourth player such as Vidéotron in a market has a direct effect on prices.

Bell has always opposed any form of competition that challenges its dominance. One need only look at the pattern of recurring anti-competitive behaviour by Bell. Here are a few examples: In December, the CRTC had to order Bell to give Vidéotron access to its network in Abitibi-Témiscamingue, a region where prices for telecommunications services are much higher than the Quebec average because of Bell’s monopoly. The CRTC has ruled that Bell TV is giving its RDS channel an undue advantage, at the expense of its competitor TVA Sports. The Quebec Court of Appeal ordered Bell to pay Quebecor $141 million for failing to prevent piracy of its satellite signals. In another vein, Bell Media’s president had to be fired for trying to control CTV’s news coverage.

These are not theories or rhetoric, but facts that have been ascertained by the courts or regulatory authorities.

In light of all of these considerations, it is our hope that the CRTC will maintain the policy of promoting facilities-based competition in the mobile market that the government adopted more than 10 years ago. That approach has been shown to deliver significant benefits for the public as a whole. Quebecor will always support fair and healthy competition. At the end of the day, it’s good for everyone.

Pierre Karl Péladeau is president and CEO of Québecor, which owns Vidéotron.