Bell Canada: Scott and Katz
p2pnet news view | P2P | Politics:- One of, if not the, most interesting revelations to emerge from the ongoing traffic throttling war between Bell Canada and its customers is the fact one of the CRTC’s top dogs, Leonard Katz, is an ex-very senior employee of both Bell Canada and Rogers.
Nor was this a case of there today, gone tomorrow.
After a long delay, the CRTC (Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission) denied the CAIP (Canadian Association of Internet Providers) demand that Bell Canada halt its traffic-shaping practices against its customers, users and smaller ISPs alike, said p2pnet, going on Kazt spent 17 years working for Rogers and 11 for Bell, the CBC elicited in a Q&A »»»
“So today’s decision isn’t an endorsement of Bell’s claims that its network is congested?” – asked the CBC.
“Absolutely not,” Katz responded. “In fact, someone told me Bell put out a press release that said the commission upheld its position that network management practices are a fundamental right of theirs. That’s not what we said at all.”
Key data detailing the level of congestion on Bell’s network, “was [sic] filed privately,” the Q&A went on, asking why that was.
“If it’s filed in confidence, it’s never released,” Katz admitted.
The CRTC, “is being criticized for siding with big business and that it has definitely happened in this case,” said the CBC. “What can you say to those criticisms?”
“We look at the specifics of each case and sometimes it falls on one side and sometimes it falls on a different side,” said Katz, going on, “In this case, given the narrow scope of this complaint, we ruled the way we did but I’m not sure anyone should be looking at this as a win-lose, it’s the start of a process.”
Later, “An error was made in the original transcription of this interview,” said the CBC going on:
“Leonard Katz was not asked the question, ‘Some critics have personally attacked you as you spent 17 years working for Rogers and 11 for Bell. How do you respond to those critics?’ as originally reported. In fact, the question was phrased, ‘There have already been some personal attacks on CRTC staffers, saying these people work for and are in league with Bell. What do you say about that?’ CBC News followed up with the original question later and Katz’s reply will also be posted when received.”
OK. But however the question was phrased, the CBC didn’t ask what some might consider to be the most important question:
Why wasn’t Katz, the ex-Bell guy, removed from the equation altogether?
No fears
One could almost say Bell, Canada’ s largest ISP, is in a monopoly position. But it isn’t. Also in the game as a supposed competitor is Rogers, with Telus lurking in the background.
Is there such a thing as a tri-opoly?
But Canadians do have Sheridan Scott as Canada’s Commissioner of Competition, the head of the Competition Bureau.
So no fears there. She’s certain to be an impartial senior government bureaucrat.
Just like Katz.
However, “before joining the Competition Bureau in January 2004, Ms. Scott was Chief Regulatory Officer of” [you guessed it] Bell Canada,” says her official site, going on:
“She was responsible for overseeing all activities involving the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), the Copyright Board and the Competition Bureau on behalf of Bell Canada, Bell Mobility and Bell ExpressVu. Ms. Scott previously served as Vice-president – Office of the President and Vice-president, Multimedia Law and Regulation at Bell Canada.”
Not only but also, “From 1983 to 1992, she worked as Legal Counsel and Senior Legal Counsel at the CRTC, where she was involved in major hearings on long distance competition, the regulation of cable rates and the renewal of pay and specialty licences.”
Could she have become involved? She could have. But she didn’t.
It’s an interesting situation where one important ex-Bell executive runs an important government bureau designed to make sure everything is fair and square, and another important ex-Bell person sits right at the top of an equally important agency designated to make a ruling which will have a direct effect on Bell Canada’ s revenues.
Are any other ex-Bell employees ensconced in influential government bureaucracies, one wonders?
Stay tuned.
Did you enjoy this story, or find it interesting/useful? Help keep the posts coming by donating. No amount is too small. Cheers! And thanks.
interesting revelations – CRTC defends Bell Canada throttling decision, November 19, 2008
CBC – We’re not endorsing internet throttling: CRTC, November 20, 2008
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
November 24th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
This was mentioned earlier this summer when the complaint was filed to the CRTC. I knew the ruling would end up in favor of Bell because of this coincidence… and by coincidence I mean conflict of interest. This sadly gives me the impression that the voices of small businesses and the general population have little chance of being heard in the telecom industry. The bottom line meaning of Mr. Katz’s comment “start of a precess” can be easily translated as “an extension permitting Bell to continue their poor business practices”.
November 24th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
No doubt the competition bureau will rule in favor of Bell as well since “Ms.” Scott is at the helm. Canada is starting to look like a complete failure for high speed internet from every corner of the earth. What I gather from most TekSavvy users is that most will simply go back to dial up, or just go offline altogether, which Im sure is what Bell is hoping for.
As for me..I’ll be moving back to the States eventually. Comcast Stateside didn’t get away with this crap..how could Canadians let Bell get away with it?!
November 25th, 2008 at 3:01 am
“how could Canadians let Bell get away with it?!”
-Bell has ther people in stratigic government positions.
People already complained to the competition burea when this started. Bell’s inside guy said nothing they can do, complain to the CRTC
-The CRTC has their Bell inside guy rule in Bell’s favor.
What next? Go back to the competition bureau?
bell already bought and paid all the people they need to do what they want.
End of story.
November 25th, 2008 at 5:49 am
I guess the CRTC never heard the term “Conflict of interest”
November 27th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
Comcast Stateside didn’t get away with this crap..how could Canadians let Bell get away with it?!
Actually, Comcast stateside is not in a position to try this crap, as the FCC does not require them to unbundle their network in the way that the CRTC requires it of telcos and cablecos in Canada.
Why wasn’t Katz, the ex-Bell guy, removed from the equation altogether?
The law has pretty strict rules on conflicts of interest. (They’re common law rules, and apply throughout the Commonwealth, with minor variations.) If those rules were broken, you can be pretty sure that the CRTC decision would be appealed for that reason. However, these rules don’t prohibit those who work in an industry from later acting as a regulator within that industry — arguably, you need that kind of expertise in order to have a regulator that is effective.
Ultimately, if you disagree with the decision, you need to go into it and define which parts were decided wrongly and where the logic falls down. It’s not that complicated.