At Bell Canada’s and Bell Aliant‘s Annual General Meetings this year, there was a questioner from the floor who appeared at both meetings.

With each of the CEOs, he pursued the question of unauthorized voice recording by call centres.

Rick Garrett, a former Aliant employee, has been campaigning for call centres to announce their recording practices for outbound calls. He is concerned about how the recordings are used and shared.

We spoke at length this week. The issue potentially crosses a number of departmental boundaries. There is, of course, the potential breech of privacy regulations. The office of the Privacy Commissioner has a fact sheet for Best Practices in the recording of calls. Since it was issued in 2002 (and updated in 2004), it is likely overdue for further refreshing.

He is also concerned with inappropriate marketing practices and sharing of information within a single call centre, but for the benefit of multiple clients. For example, if upon reviewing the tapes, a call centre manager finds a particularly vulnerable person at the end of a call, would that person be targeted for other campaigns?

What is the level of recording and voice analysis taking place by businesses in Canada and call centres located off-shore? Which agencies of government care?

As a questioner at the AGMs, Rick may not have been taken seriously by the media because of frequent digressions into tales of his personal exploits. I sympathize with him, having been known to make a short story long myself. Perhaps that is why I tried to listen to find the kernel of his concerns.

I think there are some meritorious issues to be found in his campaign. Beyond the valid privacy concerns, we need to look at how an individual deals with our regulatory structures and institutions.

One of the problems with our regulatory system is that our processes are geared for corporations and organizations with budgets to fund participation in lengthy formal proceedings. How do individuals get to participate without risking their family savings?

The CRTC has twice ordered consumers of telecom services to pay cost awards for simply participating in a proceeding, let alone being the applicant. That sure puts a chill on encouraging end-users to be a part of the process.

Where is the telecom ombudsperson as called for in the TPR?

---

Update [July 18, 4:45 pm]
The Office of the Privacy Commissioner has provided a comment, indicating that the fact sheet is currently being revised.

Update [July 23, 2:45 pm]
The Globe and Mail is reporting that the major Canadian phone companies (Bell Aliant, Bell Canada, SaskTel, Telus, MTS, Rogers, Virgin Mobile, Cogeco, Vidéotron and Vonage) have jointly filed a proposal with the CRTC to create an office of the Commissioner for Complaints for Telecommunications Services, initially to be filled by David McKendry, a former CRTC Commissioner.

Lis and Ian Angus have announced that they are retiring from the telecommunications industry at the end of the summer.

For more than 25 years, Lis and Ian have provided insights on the industry to all stakeholders in Canada: policy makers, regulators, enterprise customers, services providers and equipment suppliers.

In 1983, Ian and Lis launched Telemanagement, a respected monthly newsletter of independent views on business telecommunications. Since 1995, they have published a weekly web-based newsletter, Telecom Update, which is perhaps the most widely read telecom website in Canada (depending on the real numbers for this blog). In 2005, Lis and Ian were recognized by being among the first round of laureates named to Canada’s Telecom Hall of Fame.

Commenting on their induction into the Hall:

Being named to the Hall of Fame is a great and unexpected honour. It’s been our privilege to be part of an industry that affects every aspect of Canadian life, in a time of unprecedented change in the technology, regulation, and economics of telecommunications. We’re pleased to have been able to contribute to its continuing success.

Lis and Ian have contributed positively to enhance the quality of telecommunications consulting and analysis in this country.

We wish them the best in the next phase of their lives together.

Technorati Tags:
Lis Angus, Ian Angus, Telecom Hall of Fame

Which Canadian ILEC will be the first to boldly go forward with an investment in the future such as fibre to the home?

Verizon’s CTO, Mark Wegleitner, was recently interviewed by CNet News on the occasion of having passed the million subscriber mark for its FiOS service. On the question of whether other ILECs are getting it wrong by investing in DSL, he said:

DSL is a good technology. Our concern was more about what happens a few years out. And that’s why we picked fiber. And I can’t really predict how other technologies will grow, but we know that fiber gave us the headroom we needed.

Besides delivering a platform for innovative services, FiOS has the added benefit of inoculating against churn – Verizon is reported to be disconnecting the twisted pair to the home, and competitors do not enjoy regulated access to the fibre access plant.

From a technology solution perspective, DSL seems to almost always be playing catchup – a little behind the data capacities of coaxial cable. In late January, Videotron and Cisco announced 100Mb services over DOCSIS 3.0. IPTV over copper seems to be one of those ‘almost as good‘ solutions for broadcast TV.

When the current financial engineering focus at many of the Canadian ILECs is through, it would be interesting to see them emerge with bold announcements in innovative infrastructure and technology. Fibre would be one such approach. IMS and next generation wireless would be another.

Nearly a year ago, I had the opportunity to work with Richard Warman when we filed an application with the CRTC to address a foreign based death threat against a Canadian.

Earlier this week, the Ottawa Citizen had a feature article about Richard.

I recommend you take a look at the piece.

Sasktel has announced that it is appealing parts of the CRTC’s Price Cap Decision (2007-27), dealing with mandated price increases in ‘high cost serving areas’:

We believe the part of the CRTC’s recent Price Cap Decision that systematically reduces the amount of subsidy SaskTel receives to support residential service in high cost serving areas was not within the original scope of the proceeding. This decision essentially forces SaskTel to raise rates in high cost serving areas. We want to continue providing our customers in high cost serving areas with affordable phone service but this decision ultimately ties our hands, therefore, we feel strongly that the CRTC should re-evaluate and conduct a separate hearing to deal with this issue.

The appeal is based on procedural grounds, with SaskTel asserting that the issue was not part of the original scope of the proceeding and therefore the CRTC did not solicit sufficient evidence upon which to base its determination.

SaskTel is a provincial crown corporation. A reduction in transfer payments to rural operators (such as SaskTel) from other carriers is a resultant effect of the Price Cap determination to raise rates in high cost serving areas.

---

Update [July 13, 12:35 pm]
The appeal is in the form of a Review and Vary application back to the CRTC, asking it to review its own decision.