There are limits to the enforcement tools available to the CRTC. For certain violations, the CRTC is able to impose Administrative Monetary Penalties (AMPs) and we see these frequently being levied for companies that breech the telemarketing rules.
CRTC orders can be registered with the Courts, which means that parties that ignore the orders can be prosecuted for contempt. To my knowledge, this has only taken place once and the Court was ultimately unwilling to throw an executive in jail over illegal telephone service discounts.
In a decision today, the CRTC has announced that it will consider another approach: withholding funds from the high cost serving area subsidy fund.
At issue is the delay in implementing network modifications to enable competition in the serving areas of four small Quebec independent phone companies (CoopTel, Téléphone Guèvremont, Téléphone Milot, and Sogetel). Cogeco and TELUS had both indicated an intent to enter these territories and competition was supposed to have been implemented by July 23, 2012. By failing to meet that date, the CRTC found “that the Quebec small ILECsdid, and continue to, subject Cogeco to an unreasonable disadvantage by not having implemented local competition by 23 July 2012, contrary to the Commission’s local competition decisions, and in violation of subsection 27(2) of the Act.”
Cogeco had asked the CRTC to order a billing insert to announce whatever new date competition would be set to arrive and publicize the availability of Cogeco as a service provider. The CRTC disagreed with that approach, in effect amounting to free publicity for Cogeco, a company with much larger resources than the small ILECs.
Instead, the CRTC has launched an expedited consultation, seeking comments on the CRTC’s “preliminary view that, starting 31 January 2013, payments of subsidies to the Quebec small ILECs that have not yet implemented local competition should be withheld until local competition has been implemented in their territories.” Comments are due in just 2 weeks, with reply a week later.
The subsidies to these 4 companies is over $4 million per year, so there could be more than $350,000 per month at risk.