Liberalizing ownership rules

Last week, John Ivison wrote an article in the National Post, suggesting that liberalization of foreign ownership rules will be among reforms introduced by the government this spring. It is one of many recommendations that have been suggested by various expert panels, including the Competition Policy Review Panel and the Telecom Policy Review Panel.

Over the weekend, Dave Coles, president of the Communications Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada wrote a letter to the editor to cite the risks of having Canadian infrastructure fall into the hands of Americans – AT&T in particular:

If communications were knocked out by a disaster (such as floods or another ice storm), we might feel less secure with, say, a U.S. company that might focus on getting services for Americans up and running first. Our personal security is also at stake — Canada’s protections for individual privacy are more extensive than elsewhere. The U.S. Patriot Act allows emails and users’ records across the country to be seized on the order of a judge. If AT&T owned and controlled our communications, our privacy laws would be undermined.

Our cultural identity is also at risk –our stories, our music, our own perspective on the news. We live just north of the largest cultural machine in the world. Do we need foreign companies to pipe in yet more U.S. programming?

I think this may be a little bit over the top.

In the executive summary of the Final Report of the Telecom Policy Review Panel, we find a call to open our markets to allow increased foreign investment to increase the competitiveness of the sector and improve productivity.

The Panel concludes that liberalization of the restrictions on foreign investment in Canadian telecommunications common carriers would increase the competitiveness of the telecommunications industry, improve the productivity of Canadian telecommunications markets, and be generally more consistent with Canada’s open trade and investment policies.

Last week also saw a warning from Mark Carney, governor of the Bank of Canada, that every Canadian stands to lose $30,000 in income over the next decade – a figure that amounts to nearly $1-trillion – unless Canada improves its “abysmal” productivity levels. He is quoted saying that the US enjoys lower unit labour costs, which have boosted its competitiveness and should, ultimately, encourage job creation.

Clarity in foreign ownership regulations are essential to the communications industry; liberalizing rules will reduce the cost of capital, facilitating further investment and increasing the competitiveness of the sector.

Looking beyond the fearful concerns raised by the communications union, will existing laws and regulations, buttressed by increased competition, be sufficient to defend consumer and social interests?

Scroll to Top