Telecom - Staff Letter addressed to Philippe Gauvin (Bell Canada)
Gatineau, 17 June 2025
Reference: 1011-NOC2016-0293
BY EMAIL
Philippe Gauvin
Assistant General Counsel
Bell Canada
Floor 19, 160 Elgin Street
Ottawa, Ontario K2P 2C4
bell.regulatory@bell.ca
Subject: Wireless Code Compliance – Apparent non-compliance of Bell’s device locking practices – Disclosure of information filed as confidential
Dear Philippe Gauvin,
In a letter sent in confidence to Commission staff, Bell Canada and its flanker brand Virgin Plus (Bell) informed the Commission that they intend to start selling locked wireless devices to address an increase in crime at its points of sale.
On 9 May 2025, Commission staff issued a letter indicating that Bell is in apparent breach of the Wireless Code and seeking information on how Bell intends to remain in compliance with the device unlocking rules.
On 22 May 2025, the Commission received a letter from Marc Nanni requesting the disclosure of Bell’s initial letter, as well as any replies by the Commission, on the basis that its disclosure would be in the public interest. Bell has not responded to Mr. Nanni’s request.
I am therefore writing to request that you file your initial letter on the public record of the above-referenced proceeding by 27 June 2025. If you are unable to file the letter in its entirety on the public record, provide an abridged version and a detailed explanation as to why certain information in the letter should be kept confidential.
Confidentiality Process
Pursuant to section 39(4)(a) of the Telecommunications Act (the Act), the Commission may disclose information designated as confidential or require its disclosure if it determines, after considering any representations from interested persons, that disclosure is in the public interest.
To ensure confidentiality matters are dealt with expeditiously and Commission resources are expended efficiently, the Commission has adopted a two-step process. The first step is that Commission staff reviews the parties’ confidentiality submissions and issues a non-binding determination on what information should be refiled on the public record or remain confidential. Most disclosure requests are completed at this step.
If a party does not agree with Commission staff’s determination or a party that is requested to disclose information does not do so in accordance with Commission staff’s instructions, that party or any other interested person may engage the second step and request a binding Commission determination on the same confidentiality record. The Commission makes this determination through a Commission letter signed by the Secretary General. As with any Commission determination, such a determination is enforceable or reviewable pursuant to the Act.
Sincerely,
Nanao Kachi
Director, Social and Consumer Policy
CC: Iva Jurisic, Senior Policy Analyst, Social and Consumer Policy, CRTC, iva.jurisic@crtc.gc.ca
Distribution List
Bell Canada: bell.regulatory@bell.ca
Marc Nanni: mn_crtc@proton.me
- Date modified: