Canadian Authorities Pressured by Privacy Chiefs, Telcos
Canadian lawmakers and telecom regulators are facing heat from federal, provincial and territorial privacy officials and telcos that rely on others’ facilities to provide Internet access. Privacy officials last week urged lawmakers to scale back bills that were tabled in June, but expected to return next year, that would expand surveillance powers, especially over wireless communications. A coalition of ISPs also launched a campaign to pressure the Cabinet of Canada to overrule a Canadian Radio-TV and Telecom Commission decision last year that found “wholesale ethernet services” by incumbents such as Bell Canada aren’t “essential” -- and thus not subject to government-regulated wholesale rates.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Privacy officials warned in a resolution from a recent gathering that “the federal government has presented no compelling evidence that new powers are needed” for surveillance. They're upset about the Investigative Powers for the 21st Century Act (C-46), which would empower Canadian law enforcement, national security agencies and others to require telcos to “preserve and turn over details of their subscribers’ communications.” They could also apply for orders to trace mobile devices. The Technical Assistance for Law Enforcement in the 21st Century Act (C-47), similar to the U.S. surveillance law CALEA, would give law enforcement and agencies information on subscribers and their devices without a warrant, and require telcos to build interception capabilities into their networks for authorities.
The bills would give authorities access to e-mail, IP addresses -- considered personally identifiable in Canada -- and unlisted phone numbers without a warrant, privacy officials said. “Canadians … expect their use of computers and mobile devices to remain private,” but the bills could open them up to investigations for “even minor infractions and non-criminal matters,” the resolution said. Canada’s legal framework for protecting personal rights while aiding authorities’ investigations have been “carefully refined over decades by Parliament and the courts.” Officials urged lawmakers to require the government to demonstrate the powers they seek are “essential” and “justified,” and if they're granted, to limit their use to “specific, serious crimes and life-threatening emergencies.” New laws should be “minimally intrusive,” retain existing rules for court authorization, be reviewed publicly in draft form before taking effect, and include “effective oversight,” including a five-year parliamentary review, officials said.
ISPs that rely on incumbent networks started a new public campaign at CompetitiveBroadband.com to make the case that the CRTC’s decision will lead to “massive price increases designed to choke off competition” for Bell, Telus and other incumbents. “One way or another, we foresee higher prices, lower service standards, and little if any innovation,” said the campaign, led by MTS Allstream and including the Canadian Association of Internet Providers and the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. The association has long been at odds with the incumbents in CRTC disputes over traffic management, privacy and, most recently, usage-based billing (CD Aug 14 p7).
The CRTC decision applies to next-generation broadband facilities built by incumbents, whose taxpayer-funded buildouts and monopolies in the past gave them an unfair advantage for future services, the independent ISPs said. The new Web site said incumbents control about 90 percent of the local market for business telecom services already, and that Canada is near the bottom of affordable broadband among Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development members -- behind only Mexico and Turkey. If Bell and Telus “re-monopolize” the business telecom market, they will “feel no pressure to innovate and Canadian productivity will be at risk.”
In an increasingly popular move by Canadian advocates, the ISPs warned against Canada copying policies adopted by the U.S., blaming telecom deregulation for huge U.S. economic and job losses. Noting the commission said independent ISPs could build their own facilities, the ISPs said “our tax dollars helped Bell and Telus” build their own networks, and it was “completely unreasonable to expect” that ISPs can build their own “parallel” facilities. Better to require incumbents to share their new networks at affordable rates, because they will “offer more attentive service and more attractive offers when they know you have a choice,” the site said. Users that want to protest the CRTC decision can choose from a prewritten letter directed to Industry Minister Tony Clement, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, opposition leader Michael Ignatieff and their member of Parliament, or write their own letter to those officials, using the Web site.