Publication Search

Thank you, Madam Chair, and to the witnesses for your testimony today.

Mr. Boswell, maybe I can start with you. Yesterday, as I'm sure you heard, a representative from the CNOC, Madam Shaban, raised some concern regarding the efficiency defence. She indicated that use of the efficiency defence might render this whole process of review fruitless.

Can you share with us your thoughts on that and the applicability of the efficiency defence in this case?

Thank you.

Is this an area that you are going to consider re-evaluating when the Competition Act is up for review?

I have about 45 seconds left. I'd like to quickly go to Mr. Scott.

Mr. Scott, yesterday we heard from Mr. White that two sections—specifically section 7 and section 24—of the Telecommunications Act are the solution for a quick evaluation of this merger. What are your thoughts on that?

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and all of our witnesses for their testimony today.

Let me start with you, Ms. Shaban. There has been so much talk about the efficiencies defence. I understand that this defence can be used as it relates to gaining economies of scale as well as cost savings, with the purpose of their being able to remain competitive internationally. Is my understanding correct?

Okay. Thank you for that.

In your opinion, when Rogers and Shaw merge, what international competition are they trying to fend off? Is this clause really relevant to this merger?

If we have restrictions on foreign investment coming in, do we really have international competition that we are trying to fend off if that restriction is there?

Thank you.

In a sense, if you opened up the competition and allowed foreign internationals—for example, some U.S. company—to come in and invest in Shaw, it might help Shaw enlarge its footprint across Canada, with it therefore not only remaining as a fourth player but also expanding its service range. Is that something we should consider?

I'm sorry. I apologize for interrupting. I have about a minute left and I'd really like to go to Mr. White.

Mr. White, you suggested that between the Competition Bureau and the CRTC, they really have all they need. If I understood you correctly, you specifically said that this is really not about the Competition Bureau. It's about the CRTC, and the CRTC has what it needs. Can you expand on what you meant specifically by saying that the CRTC has what it needs? What is that need?

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses. Those were quite informative interventions that you made.

Let me start with Mr. Kaplan-Myrth and TekSavvy, and continue on the competition.

As you heard in—or as I'm sure you reviewed—the previous committee interventions by Rogers, as well as Shaw, they talked about the fact that this merger not only increases the competition but also allows them to be able to expand and make investments in rural, remote and indigenous areas.

My question to you.... You talked about investment versus competition. What do you think Rogers means when they say that the competition is increasing, and what is your point of view regarding the competition?

Thank you. I'll go back to you again, Mr. Kaplan-Myrth.

Much has been made of the upcoming CRTC MVNO decision. Your company has been very vocal on this issue. Theoretically speaking, if Rogers were willing to waive its opposition to the mandated access, would your organization support that merger?

I have a last question for you, Mr. Kaplan-Myrth.

In terms of an investment view your company would take when this merger happens, if it happens, how would it impact your decisions on making investments in various regions within Canada?

Thank you. I'm out of time.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Welcome to all our witnesses today. Congratulations, Mr. Shaw, on becoming a grandfather.

I would like to focus on the investment. Can both Mr. Natale and Mr. Shaw give us an understanding of this? Prior to the merger, what types of investments were your organizations planning, specifically on making sure that we eliminate the digital divide? Also, as a result of this merger, what kinds of investments are planned going forward? As a result of this merger, by the time it goes to review, is there any halt in the investment that both organizations were planning?

Any of you may start.

Yes.