Minister Bains instructs CRTC to reconsider decision on mandated wholesale roaming

Comments

  • Pingback: Minister Bains instructs CRTC to reconsider its Sugar Mobile decision | Daily Update()

  • TomsDisqusted

    We need real MNVO’s in Canada.

    Making one off decisions, eg, to allow Sugar mobile, smacks of politics and that type of politics is an invitation to lobbyists and corruption.

    • Laer

      I’m not sure what you are getting at. Bains asked the framework to be revisited. He did not give direction for one MNVO or carrier to be favored over any other.

      You want to go one about how politics is dirty and lobbyists are the dirt. Fine, but the decision Bains made, well obviously very political, doesn’t validate Sugar or any other specific company. It is, in fact, so vague it doesn’t even give specific direction to the CRTC. They are well within their means to review the topic and reach the very same conclusion they did in the first place.

  • fidorulz

    The main issue not mentioned by Navdeep Bains is how Sugar accessed Rogers network by using ICE wireless and trying to keep Rogers out of the loop even if its their network.

    The best way I see how this is wrong is its basically like you renting out a home to someone.

    Then they sub rent the home without telling the owner.

    • It’s Me

      Except that ICE and Sugar are the same company.

      Rogers wanted to partner with ICE and provided their standard reciprocal agreement, so both sides had access to the other’s network. ICE decided this included their daughter brand, Sugar, and extended the same coverage to both sets of their customers.

      I wonder, can Fido/Chatr users roam on ICE with the same conditions as a Rogers user? If so, then they are doing the same thing Sugar wanted to do.

  • Pingback: Government of Canada aims to broaden rural satellite internet coverage with licensing updates | Daily Update()

  • Pingback: Canadian government to launch consult on new 5G spectrum, emphasize competition | Daily Update()

  • Leif Shantz

    Hoping this will pave the way for more affordable cellphone​ bills.

  • Bill___A

    We don’t want the regulators to provide a dis-incentive for the carriers to invest. Making someone spend billions to build and maintain a network, then forcing them to rent it out to just anyone is just plan wrong. The government gets billions of dollars in spectrum licensing, property owners charge rent for cell locations. There are many parties that contribute to our sky high rates. We do need lower rates, but not this way. It is just going get us a much poorer system.
    If they wanted to have a bunch of equal players they should have had one company put out all the towers and everyone rent space on them – but instead, we had companies each build out on their own.

    I understand that the reason Calgary is not first in the fiber to the home builds has a lot do to with the mayor wanting to let the cable company use it. The net result is we mostly don’t have fiber to the home…

    • Barry Harden

      Sure but the fact that it’s the government, which is the pubic, allowed said carriers on our land to build such networks. We should have a say on how we can introduce fair competition.

      As for towers you couldn’t be more wrong on that part. There’s a high cost involved and the carriers know that. This is why there are network sharing arrangements in place between the big three providers.

    • Goran Mihajlović

      The proliferation of MVNOs in the US, and Europe says otherwise. Please spare us the fear mongering. Plus, TPIA is working just fine.

  • hardy83

    You’re the federal government. If you want to make it easier for the middle class to afford communication, YOU have more power than the CRTC does.
    Change the telecom act, make laws that ban data caps, lower roaming charges and remove locked phone charges or locked phones all together.

    Telling the CRTC to do something means nothing when it’s bound by acts that YOU, the federal government, write and alter.

    • US Grant

      They’ll probably mandate that closer to the federal election to buy votes. LOL