On March 14, Yak filed a Part VII application asking for the incumbent phone companies to file updated cost studies for their billing and collection services. Recall that 2 years ago, Yak first raised the issue of excessive profits being reaped by the ILECs for billing and collection services back in late 2006.
At the time, the ILECs asked the CRTC to delay hearing the case until the essential services proceeding finished. Their position was that billing and collection wasn’t essential, so it would be a waste of time to review the rate structure.
Fast forward to March 3, when I noted that the CRTC sided with Yak. So, a week and a half later, Yak asked again for the telcos to be ordered to file new cost studies.
Bell waited until 31 days later – a day late – to say that the dog ate their homework. TELUS didn’t write in until a day later, possibly having realized that oops, it too missed the deadline and said it agrees with everything those other ILECs said.
My favourite line from the extension letter:
The Companies are writing without prejudice to their rights to file substantive comments should that be necessary, to request that the Commission defer consideration of the Application at this time.
What rights? Under the rules, you have the right to reply within 30 days. Translate that sentence into layman’s terms: I know that my term paper is late, so please grant me an extension and if you disagree, then I don’t want the fact that I asked for an extension to be held against me when I finally get around to submitting the paper.
Both groups asked for an extension because they said that they plan to appeal the CRTC’s ruling about a month from now. Bell said:
Deferring consideration of Yak’s Application is consistent with the principles of efficient, informed and timely regulation enshrined in section 1(c) of the Policy Direction.
It would have made a far more credible argument for “timely regulation” if Bell and TELUS hadn’t waited until after their term paper was due to ask the teacher for an extension.
Efficient, informed, and timely regulation would call for timetables to be adhered to. If and when the ILECs get around to filing their appeals, they can make their case to stay the process.
If they were in school, their professor would give them a zero. Maybe the CRTC should take the opportunity to send a clear message about efficient, informed and timely regulation. Why not immediately make the current billing and collection rates interim and rule immediately in Yak’s favour – order the new cost studies to be done within 30 days. Now that would be efficient and timely.