Summary

  • CRTC staff found that information in the Videotron–SaskTel roaming case is blacked out in some filings and public in others. It has asked the parties whether general process facts should be disclosed.
  • Its proposed line would expose the existence and outcome of any relevant negotiation or arbitration, if such material is on the record, while leaving specific rates and monetary awards confidential.
  • Videotron and SaskTel have until 13 November to explain why the identified material should stay hidden. The regulator has made no disclosure or merits ruling in this letter.

The black bars have become an issue in their own right. On 30 October, staff at the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission said it had compared public and confidential versions of filings in a Saskatchewan wholesale-roaming dispute. Some of the same information was redacted in one place and public in another. The regulator wants an explanation before deciding what belongs in the open record.

Quebecor Media Inc., acting for Videotron Ltd., filed the case on 11 June. It alleges undue preference by Saskatchewan Telecommunications, known as SaskTel, and asks for changes to wholesale-roaming regulation in the province. SaskTel responded that it could not meaningfully address some of Videotron's confidential material without procedural directions. The CRTC extended filing deadlines in July. These are the parties' positions and procedural steps, not a finding on roaming conduct.

The staff letter draws a practical boundary. It asks whether the public should be able to learn that negotiations, an ISED arbitration, or roaming agreements exist, who the parties are, and what outcome followed where those facts appear in the record. It does not propose exposing the specific rates, monetary awards or contractual terms behind those processes. It even points to ordinary introductory passages and document headers that were blacked out. A hidden price may protect a bargain; a hidden heading does much less work.

The regulator has not said that any particular arbitration, deal or outcome occurred. Its questions repeatedly say if found on the record. Videotron and SaskTel may answer by 13 November. Parties claiming confidentiality must identify specific, direct harm and explain why that harm outweighs public disclosure. The material stays confidential while the CRTC decides. A separate ruling on whether disputed material is admissible comes later.

Sources