Bell, Telus push back on proposed public hearing into wireless fees

Canada’s largest telecommunications companies have drawn battle lines ahead of an upcoming CRTC investigation into whether the companies are violating a new commission policy prohibiting fees that deter consumers from changing providers. Telus Corp. and BCE Inc. have asked the regulator to reject requests from the Forum for Research and Policy in Communications (FRPC) and Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC), both of which have called for the CRTC to hold a public hearing on the matter. Last month, the commission launched a show cause proceeding requiring each of Canada’s Big Three, which also includes Rogers Communications Inc., to demonstrate how various wireless fees, each of which have caught the regulator’s ire in recent weeks, do not violate the commission’s new policy banning fees that disincentive switching plans. “This oral hearing will not only better assist the Commission in developing the record required to determine the nature and scope of any violation, but also enable it to consider the appropriate enforcement measures, and potential liabilities based on a clear and fulsome record,” wrote Tahira Dawood, PIAC’s acting general counsel. “Public accountability is critical and an oral hearing will provide the Commission a direct opportunity to question and hear from the companies and all other interested parties, rather than just through a paper proceeding.” Meanwhile, FRPC executive director Monica Auer said a hearing would allow “perspectives and evidence from members of the public be more readily balanced against the arguments of the companies.” Both Telus and Bell pushed back against the idea, with Telus vice-president Stephen Schmidt arguing that “an oral hearing would result in additional process, expenditure of time and resources and undue delay.” “Indeed, oral hearings impose costs on all parties,” he wrote. “In the current proceeding, written submissions are sufficient to allow for a full examination of the issues.” At the time of writing, the CRTC had received 25 written interventions on the subject, most of which were submitted by individuals. Interested parties have until July 30 to provide comments. Rogers did not comment on the need for a public hearing but, along with Bell, endorsed Telus’ procedural request for the show cause proceeding to be separated into two separate examinations. According to Telus, the CRTC is seemingly prepared to levy fines against the telcos without determining whether a violation has occurred, which the B.C. service provider alleged was a “procedural error.” “It appears that the Commission has already prejudged that an AMP (administrative monetary penalty) is the appropriate remedy, despite not having heard from the parties,” wrote Telus’s Schmidt. “As reflected in the Commission’s own guidelines, AMPs are not intended to be the first enforcement option and the CRTC is not obliged to issue an AMP, but may do so if a violation is found.” Telus suggested the CRTC should solely consider whether the companies violated the new policy on wireless fees and, if necessary, the commission could initiate a new proceeding to determine what penalty is needed. Per the CRTC, any company found to be in violation could face fines up to $10 million and orders to become compliant with the rules. The Big Three also want the CRTC to outline why it feels the telcos might be breaking the rules around fees that prevent switching plans, alleging the commission “has not articulated any reasons for why the listed practices and product prices violate” the policy. Additionally, Telus, Rogers, and Bell asked that CRTC staff members who have “already publicly expressed a judgment that certain fees and practices of the Companies are prohibited” would be excluded from the upcoming investigation. In particular, the companies asked that Scott Hutton, CRTC vice-president for consumer, analytics, and strategy, recuse himself from the proceeding, as he penned letters to each of the telcos warning of imposing various wireless fees. dlegree@thewirereport.ca

Bell, Telus push back on proposed public hearing into wireless fees

Regulatory |
By Davis Legree
|July 24, 2026

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Bell, Telus push back on proposed public hearing into wireless fees

Regulatory | By Davis Legree |July 24, 2026

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

TekSavvy and co. ask CRTC to review and vary wholesale access rates

Q&A: Sheri Somerville can feel the CRTC shifting on competition

CRTC disallows four-year-old review and vary application from Bell

Related Stories

TekSavvy and co. ask CRTC to review and vary wholesale access rates

Q&A: Sheri Somerville can feel the CRTC shifting on competition

CRTC disallows four-year-old review and vary application from Bell

Interventions from public support CRTC combining consumer protection codes

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Regulatory |
By Davis Legree
|July 24, 2026