On Friday, the CRTC gave approval to 5-year license renewals for Shaw and Videon cable systems in various Western Canadian operating areas, and for Novus, operating in Greater Vancouver. The licensees had sought seven year licenses, but the CRTC limitted both sets of licenses to 5 years because of issues with compliance by the companies.
These short-term renewals will permit the Commission to review at an earlier date the licensees’ compliance with the Broadcasting Distribution Regulations and their conditions of licence.
There is a special section appended to the Broadcasting Decisions [2010-820 for Shaw/Videon and 2010-821 for Novus] called “Additional Considerations of the hearing Panel” that sets out the frustration of the CRTC in dealing with regulated entities that don’t comply with regulations. It is an unusual addendum, written more like a dissent, but apparently carrying the support of the full panel of Commissioners. It may be the start of a campaign to increase regulatory powers for the CRTC.
Once again, the Commission is required to rely on sub-optimal regulatory tools to address non-compliance issues, resulting in less effective and more costly regulation, to the detriment of the broadcasting system and all Canadians.
Right now, if a company falls afoul of the rules, the CRTC has to wait until it is time to renew the licenses, and as punishment, it can either cut them off completely by not renewing their license (highly unlikely) or it can make the carrier go through the time-consuming renewal process more frequently by granting shorter license periods. The CRTC wants the power to issue fines: “administrative monetary penalties.”
Canada would benefit from amendments to the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act to provide more timely and relevant regulatory compliance tools. These should include the ability for the Commission to issue administrative monetary penalties (AMPs) with regard to non-compliance matters and transgressions by licensees. Most G20 members have granted their communications regulators the authority to issue AMPs.
Based on the CRTC’s experience, the use of short-term licence renewals, don’t act as an effective enough deterrent. According to the addendum, some companies have demonstrated that the a shorter licence term at the next licence renewal (a number of years away), is a better business decision than incurring short-term costs needed to comply with their regulatory obligations.
A case in point is the obligation to meet Commission obligations relating to accessibility. Delays in meeting Commission objectives deny Canadians with disabilities meaningful access to programming in a timely manner, while the licensee is only judged at licence renewal, which can be years away.
In other words, the CRTC would like greater flexibility in the ability to deal with those parties that flout the rules. The hearing Panel observed the lack of fining powers hampers the Commission in effectively discharging its regulatory oversight for both broadcasters and telecommunications carriers.
The CRTC has such powers to deal with violations of the Telemarketing Rules and it may acquire similar powers associated with the new anti-Spam Bill C-28.
Canada is in the process of defining our role and priorities within the digital economy. Now would be the best time to cut through these delays and curtail regulatory bureaucracy by providing the Commission with the tools to act in the least intrusive and least invasive manner.
Expect to see a campaign to open the CRTC Act to add these greater fining powers.