Maybe it’s because my mind is still on vacation mode, but I had a hard time reading and deciphering the CRTC’s decisions last Friday. That is why it has taken a couple extra days to write this piece.
The Commission reviewed its ethernet orders that were released in January (see “CRTC driving wholesale access to NGN“). It reaffirmed parts, but reversed itself on some of the most contentious parts.
When the original ethernet access orders were released, I wrote:
There is an underlying subtext that needs to be explored at another time. The CRTC found that wholesale ethernet and ADSL are non-essential services, yet the Commission is imposing rates and terms that differ from those initially proposed by the ILECs. Contrast this to the Minister’s direction that requires the CRTC to determine the extent to which regulation of non-essential services should be phased out.
Among the issues considered in last week’s decision is the matter that there is a major Essential Services proceeding underway that could impact all of the competitor services that were under consideration in the January orders. The ILECs complained that the net effect was the possibility of subjecting certain services to three different regulatory regimes in an 18 month period – hardly consistent with the Policy Direction to ensure that regulation is minimal, efficient and proportionate.
The CRTC agreed, in part, that “there is substantial doubt as to the ongoing correctness of its determinations with respect to new services and new rates that are the subject of the review and vary applications.”