Did the CRTC go too far when it ordered ILECs to offer unbundled wholesale ethernet services?
That is what Bell, Bell Aliant and TELUS have charged in separate appeals. The TELUS application says:
First, that the Commission has exceeded its jurisdiction by ordering the construction of new facilities and the provision of New Services to competitors beyond those currently provided by the TELUS network. Second, in Order 2007-20 the Commission has erred in law by failing to apply the recent Policy Direction, which was issued by Order in Council of the Governor in Council and which the Commission is required by law to apply.
In addition, TELUS submits that there is a substantial doubt as to the correctness of Order 2007-20, as it fails to consider a basic principle which had been raised in the original proceeding.
Encouraging facilities-based competition was the basic principle that TELUS claims was ignored.
The effect of the Order will be to seriously erode the value of TELUS’ investments in advanced networks in both central and western Canada. The Order will discourage such investments by TELUS and by new entrants as well.
My posting earlier this morning spoke about unintended consequences of government action. Will mandated unbundling of ethernet lead to a US-style stagnation of investment in broadband facilities?