Federal regulators should avoid private meetings with lobbyists in barrooms, the Federal Court of Appeal warned, following a controversial 2019 beer summit between then-CRTC CEO Ian Scott and Bell Canada’s chief executive. Blacklock's Reporter says the encounter, photographed by a passerby, has sparked significant scrutiny.“Why were the two together? What was discussed? Why were just the two of them there without any witnesses?” questioned Justice David Stratas. “Quite simply, meetings between two people — one a regulator and one a regulatee — without any independent witnesses or other evidence to substantiate why the meeting happened and what was discussed can be a recipe for trouble,” he wrote.The incident, documented by TekSavvy Solutions Inc., a Chatham, Ont.-based firm, highlighted concerns over a CRTC rate ruling that favored Bell. The photograph showed Mirko Bibic, CEO of Bell Canada Enterprises, drinking with then-CEO Ian Scott of the Canadian Radio Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC). At the time, Bell had business pending before the CRTC.The two executives met on December 19, 2019, just a week after Bell filed an application with the CRTC to review and vary its decision regarding wholesale rates. Months later, on May 27, 2021, the CRTC reversed its decision on internet rates, benefiting Bell. TekSavvy challenged the contradictory ruling, arguing the barroom meeting was inappropriate.The Court of Appeal rejected TekSavvy’s challenge but acknowledged the issues raised by private meetings with lobbyists. “Private meetings should not be means by which secret submissions can be offered outside of the hearing room away from the eyes and ears of other parties to the public,” wrote Justice Stratas. “This subverts fairness and should not happen.”“The court has a general power of supervision over federal tribunals and it would be remiss if it did not offer a word or two about meetings between a regulator and a frequent party before it such as the one in this case,” added Stratas. “Meetings between regulators and regulatees outside of the hearing room are a tricky area.”The CRTC had denied any impropriety. Scott admitted in 2022 testimony at the Commons industry committee that he discussed business with the lobbyist. “Does it not give you pause to have meetings like that knowing decisions you make are so consequential for companies?” asked Liberal MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith (Beaches-East York, Ont.). “Our meetings are recorded,” replied Scott. “Presumably your meeting in that bar wasn’t recorded,” said Conservative MP Bernard Généreux (Montmagny-L’Islet, Que.). “I have meetings,” replied Scott.In its post-barroom ruling, the CRTC upheld Bell’s objections to offering reduced wholesale rates to smaller competitors like TekSavvy. TekSavvy called the decision the “tombstone on the grave of telecom competition in Canada.”The Ethics Commissioner, in a 2022 ruling, stated that the barroom meeting breached no rules. “Mr. Scott wrote that he paid for his own drink,” the commissioner noted in his Scott Report.
Federal regulators should avoid private meetings with lobbyists in barrooms, the Federal Court of Appeal warned, following a controversial 2019 beer summit between then-CRTC CEO Ian Scott and Bell Canada’s chief executive. Blacklock's Reporter says the encounter, photographed by a passerby, has sparked significant scrutiny.“Why were the two together? What was discussed? Why were just the two of them there without any witnesses?” questioned Justice David Stratas. “Quite simply, meetings between two people — one a regulator and one a regulatee — without any independent witnesses or other evidence to substantiate why the meeting happened and what was discussed can be a recipe for trouble,” he wrote.The incident, documented by TekSavvy Solutions Inc., a Chatham, Ont.-based firm, highlighted concerns over a CRTC rate ruling that favored Bell. The photograph showed Mirko Bibic, CEO of Bell Canada Enterprises, drinking with then-CEO Ian Scott of the Canadian Radio Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC). At the time, Bell had business pending before the CRTC.The two executives met on December 19, 2019, just a week after Bell filed an application with the CRTC to review and vary its decision regarding wholesale rates. Months later, on May 27, 2021, the CRTC reversed its decision on internet rates, benefiting Bell. TekSavvy challenged the contradictory ruling, arguing the barroom meeting was inappropriate.The Court of Appeal rejected TekSavvy’s challenge but acknowledged the issues raised by private meetings with lobbyists. “Private meetings should not be means by which secret submissions can be offered outside of the hearing room away from the eyes and ears of other parties to the public,” wrote Justice Stratas. “This subverts fairness and should not happen.”“The court has a general power of supervision over federal tribunals and it would be remiss if it did not offer a word or two about meetings between a regulator and a frequent party before it such as the one in this case,” added Stratas. “Meetings between regulators and regulatees outside of the hearing room are a tricky area.”The CRTC had denied any impropriety. Scott admitted in 2022 testimony at the Commons industry committee that he discussed business with the lobbyist. “Does it not give you pause to have meetings like that knowing decisions you make are so consequential for companies?” asked Liberal MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith (Beaches-East York, Ont.). “Our meetings are recorded,” replied Scott. “Presumably your meeting in that bar wasn’t recorded,” said Conservative MP Bernard Généreux (Montmagny-L’Islet, Que.). “I have meetings,” replied Scott.In its post-barroom ruling, the CRTC upheld Bell’s objections to offering reduced wholesale rates to smaller competitors like TekSavvy. TekSavvy called the decision the “tombstone on the grave of telecom competition in Canada.”The Ethics Commissioner, in a 2022 ruling, stated that the barroom meeting breached no rules. “Mr. Scott wrote that he paid for his own drink,” the commissioner noted in his Scott Report.
