The voice of consumers is unmistakable. Over 250,000 supporters have signed the #demandmoreinternetchoice/ #ExigezPlusDeChoixInternet petition, a remarkable response that underscores the public's desire for a more competitive telecom landscape. This groundswell of support aligns perfectly with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission's (CRTC) decision, demonstrating that the regulator is in tune with the needs and wants of Canadian consumers. 

So, at a time when Canada faces mounting economic headwinds—from global trade tensions to interprovincial barriers—the potential that the federal Cabinet will overturn the CRTC's pro-competition decision is both puzzling and alarming. This isn't merely about telecommunications policy; it's about the integrity of our regulatory framework and economic governance. The rule of law and independence are critical features of the Canadian way.  Canadians do not want to experience the overreach by political figures that our southern neighbours are currently living.  

Furthermore, the impact of increased competition is already evident. According to Statistics Canada, and notably in Ontario where TELUS entered the market, consumers who signed up for a high-speed internet plan in January 2025 paid 10.0% less than the same month in 2024. This success is a prime example of what happens when internal trade barriers are removed.

By threatening to override an evidence-based CRTC ruling that promotes market competition, the Cabinet risks undermining the credibility of Canada's entire regulatory system. The timing couldn't be worse: as our economy navigates uncertain waters, the last thing investors and businesses need is a signal that regulatory decisions are subject to political interference rather than market principles and expert analysis. Such a precedent would raise a troubling question: in an era demanding stable, predictable governance, why is Cabinet considering a move that could shake confidence in Canada's regulatory independence across all sectors? 

The CRTC’s recent decision to uphold its wholesale fibre framework was a pivotal moment for competition, affordability, and innovation in Canada's telecom sector. The ruling, which mandates major telecoms to provide access to their high speed networks, is a response to the clear demand from Canadians for more choice and better services, something this same Liberal Government advocated for in its policy directive in 2023. Shouldn’t policymakers celebrate the fact that their competition policy is finally working as intended? 

The CRTC's decision stands on remarkably solid ground, backed by both exhaustive research, a balanced approach that takes into account investment and competition. Through a meticulous 17-month review process, the CRTC concluded that "consumer benefits brought about by Large Incumbent access to the Temporary Service outweighed any impact that access had on investment." This isn't abstract policy-speak—it translates directly to better service and lower prices for Canadians without compromising future infrastructure development. The decision's credibility is further reinforced by multiple layers of validation: the CRTC's own subsequent reaffirmation, the Competition Bureau's endorsement, and a comprehensive stakeholder consultation process that considered impacts on competition, investment, and consumer welfare. To overturn such a carefully calibrated decision, one that emerged from this laborious, data-driven process, would require extraordinary justification—justification that, notably, appears to be lacking.

What does it say about Canada’s regulatory model when a decision of such magnitude can be reversed with the stroke of a pen by Cabinet? As Mark Furer pointed out, "All the players in the telecom market rely on a system where the government sets the rules in the law, while an independent regulator applies them, acting as a neutral referee." This system ensures fair competition for the benefit of consumers, forming the backbone of a robust telecom market that delivers high-quality services.

Moreover, the CRTC’s framework is breaking down interprovincial barriers in the telecom space. By allowing Western companies like TELUS to offer services in new regions, it is fostering a truly national competitive landscape. This cross-country competition is precisely what's needed to drive innovation, improve service quality, and keep prices in check across all provinces. 

Public sentiment strongly supports this direction. According to recent polling by Rubicon Strategies, a striking 73% of Canadians believe increased competition among internet service providers will lower prices. Additionally, 73% would doubt a government's focus on affordability if it reserved the CRTC’s decision, thereby limiting internet choice. These numbers send a clear message to the Federal Liberal Cabinet: Canadians want more competition, not less.

The CRTC's framework is not just about allowing big players to access each other's networks—it's about creating an environment where over a dozen providers, including smaller ones, can offer new retail fibre Internet service plans in Ontario and Quebec. This increased choice is the very definition of a competitive market working for consumers.

So why is the Cabinet considering limiting competition in telecom? All signs point to a political motivation, specifically a desire to protect regional interests when the path forward should be clear: support the CRTC's pro-competition framework and enable greater choice for consumers across the country. Now is not the time for interference. Rather, it is a time to remove internal trade barriers, and support well-researched and well-reasoned decisions that enable a national perspective. The government must stand firm in support of a more open, competitive, and affordable telecom market for all Canadians.

Zainul Mawji is an Executive Vice-president at TELUS, and is the President of TELUS Consumer Solutions. She is responsible for the end-to-end design and delivery of products and services across Mobility and Home Solutions.