Telus still wants CRTC to delay Rogers-Shaw hearing despite court decision on board control

One of Canada’s telecom incumbents is urging the CRTC to delay Rogers Communications Inc.’s (RCI) hearing on its merger with Shaw Communications Inc., arguing that management at the company remains uncertain despite a court ruling granting Edward Rogers full control of its board of directors and no intentions from his opposition to appeal. In an additional letter filed with the commission Monday, Telus Corp. reiterated its support for delaying the merger hearing, scheduled for five days beginning Nov. 22. Telus claimed in the letter that the commission has inconsistent information on both the immediate and future governance of Rogers. “The public interest is best served by adjourning the hearing until the uncertainty created by the internal power struggle at Rogers has been unequivocally resolved, and the commission can be assured that proceeding with the hearing will not be prejudicial to the public, its own process, and to interested parties,” Telus wrote. Telus argued that RCI lawyer Stephen Schachter urged the court to stay its Nov. 8 decision to give RCI time to file an expedited appeal because he was concerned that the new board could terminate the management and order it not to pursue an appeal. Telus then pointed out that after Edward Rogers took control, RCI did in fact issue a statement that it would not appeal, however, his family members have not done so to date. “No statement has been released by the Rogers family members, either to support the abandonment of the appeal process or to retract the previous unequivocal statements vowing to continue the legal battle. Presently, it remains unclear what action(s) they intend to take next,” Telus argued. In a Nov. 1 letter the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC-NPF) asked the CRTC to delay the merger hearing until it becomes clear who has authority over Rogers. In the original letter, PIAC argued that given the drama in the Rogers boardroom, it is “uncertain whether any submissions made in the name of Rogers continue to be supported by the company’s board of directors—or whether the officers of the company continue to have authority to act on behalf of the corporation.” Two days later Telus and BCE Inc. endorsed the proposal for delay while Rogers argued its regulatory team can present the company’s position to the CRTC commissioners regardless of who sits on the board. “The information on which the commission is being asked to rely in deciding PIAC -NPF’s request is materially incomplete. Further, to the extent that additional relevant information exists but is not public, it could have been, and ought to have been, provided to the commission in Rogers’ reply dated November 8, 2021, but was not,” Telus wrote in its most recent letter, Telus further called Edward Rogers’ statement to keep company president and CRO Joe Natale in his position insincere. Telus argued that statement contradicts sworn evidence provided by the formerly ousted now-reinstated chair in which he indicated “a distinct lack of confidence” in Natale. Furthermore, Telus noted, the events leading up to the family drama all started with Edward Rogers’ displeasure with Natale. “The commission indicated that it wished to assess at the public hearing how the proposed transaction would affect the public in a variety of ways, many of which depend on Rogers’ business plans and strategy for execution of the transaction. These include, for example, ‘the transition of services and contracts, service calls, billing practices, consumer recourse for complaints, consumer choice, and the consumer awareness of the availability of services’,” Telus wrote. “Rogers’ business plans and strategy are inextricably linked to and dependent on the leadership and corporate governance of Rogers, which for the reasons outlined above remain uncertain. So long as that uncertainty remains, the commission will not be able to fully rely on the answers it receives at the public hearing on such issues.” In a short Nov. 9 letter to the CRTC, RCI called Telus’ second intervention “an abuse of process that must be soundly rejected” and removed from the record because it did not add any additional information to the public process and reiterated old concerns. “Not only has Telus continued to grossly exaggerate its concerns surrounding Rogers’ corporate governance, but its suggestion that the commission could not proceed with a hearing until it is certain that there will be no change to a company’s senior management team remains untenable and absurd,” RCI wrote in its reply. -- Reporting by Jenna Cocullo at jcocullo@thewirereport.ca and editing by Michael Lee-Murphy at mleemurphy@thewirereport.ca

Telus still wants CRTC to delay Rogers-Shaw hearing despite court decision on board control

Broadcast | November 11, 2021

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

Telus still wants CRTC to delay Rogers-Shaw hearing despite court decision on board control

Broadcast | November 11, 2021

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

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Related Stories

Streamers challenge ‘restrictive’ CanCon definitions in audio proceeding

Bell looking to CRTC for clarity on mobile PES requirements

Supreme Court rules CRTC cannot grant telcos access to public property to install wireless equipment

Bell accuses Rogers of undue preference over Shaw Direct channel placements

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us