Regulatory Independence Is on the Line

Markets thrive when rules are clear, decisions are fair, and regulators are free to follow the evidence.

Regulatory independence isn’t a technicality—it’s a cornerstone of democratic capitalism. When upheld, it enables decisions grounded in evidence rather than politics, driving lower prices, better service, and long-term investment in the infrastructure Canadians rely on every day.

On June 20, 2025, the CRTC reaffirmed—for the sixth time—its wholesale fibre access framework, concluding once again that the policy is increasing competition, reducing prices, and expanding choice for Canadians. The CRTC decision followed a two-year public process, with over 300 participants, thousands of pages of evidence, and multiple expert reviews, including from the Competition Bureau. The message from Canada’s independent regulator could not be clearer: the framework is working.

Under this framework, regional incumbents like Bell, TELUS, and SaskTel must offer wholesale access to competitors. Crucially, it also permits large national players to compete outside their home territories, bringing needed choice to markets long dominated by regional monopolies, while protecting future investment through a sensible five-year holiday for new builds.

The CRTC’s model balances local market conditions with national competition, ensuring that incumbents face real pressure while maintaining strong incentives to invest. This balance depends on a vital ingredient: regulatory independence—an institutional safeguard that enables lower prices, faster fibre rollout, and long-term investor confidence.

Yet in Canada, this independence is being tested. In 2024, the federal Cabinet attempted to interfere with the CRTC decision and exclude certain carriers from participating in the wholesale framework. That effort was rejected, but political pressure continues from status quo beneficiaries, with new calls to overturn the very decision the CRTC just upheld. Overriding this decision would set a dangerous precedent, replacing evidence with lobbying as the basis for economic policy.

It would also contradict the government’s stated priorities. The Carney government has championed Bill C-5, aimed at removing barriers to interprovincial trade and mobility in a “One Canadian Economy.” Fittingly, that bill passed through the House of Commons on the same day the CRTC upheld its decision, with support from multiple political parties. Undermining a national wholesale access regime would do the opposite, reinforcing regional monopolies and limiting national competition.

Why Regulatory Certainty Fuels Investment and Why It’s at Risk in Canada

Regulatory certainty is the bedrock of long-term investment. When governments respect independent regulators and uphold their decisions, they signal stability to investors. When they don’t, capital leaves.

The CRTC’s June 20 decision reflects a robust, evidence-based process. But even after this ruling, political lobbying continues, and appears to have escalated following the CRTC’s decision, raising the risk that Cabinet might intervene. That sends the wrong message to investors: that even the most exhaustive regulatory outcome can be reversed under pressure.

We’ve seen the consequences elsewhere. Canada’s second-largest pension fund, Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, recently reduced its exposure to U.S. markets, citing unpredictable policy environments. It shifted toward jurisdictions like the UK, where institutional decisions are more stable. Canada should seize this opportunity—not squander it—by reinforcing confidence in its own regulatory frameworks.

The implications extend far beyond telecom. Capital flows across sectors, from telecom to AI, clean tech, healthcare, and the broader digital economy. If political actors can overturn well-reasoned regulatory outcomes in one sector, uncertainty spreads across all sectors. As one major investor recently said, “When the rules can change after the game is played, you stop playing.”

The European model offers a powerful contrast. Regulators across the EU allow even the largest operators to enter new markets based on competitive conditions, not political interference. This approach has consistently delivered rapid fibre deployment, broad consumer choice, and affordable prices—thanks to a steadfast commitment to regulatory independence.

As a founding member of the OECD and chair of 25 of its committees, Canada has long championed global best practices in regulatory governance. The OECD’s guidance on Creating a Culture of Independence is unequivocal: credible regulatory institutions depend on transparency, protection from political interference, and accountability rooted in evidence—not headlines. Canada has helped set that international standard. It should now rise to meet it.

If the federal government intervenes to reverse the CRTC’s decision, it risks weakening the very institutions that underpin fair markets, investor confidence, and democratic accountability. This is a test of Canada’s resolve to build a cohesive, competitive national economy, where companies can scale across provinces, where investors can trust the rules of the game, and where independent expertise is respected above short-term political pressure. Upholding the CRTC’s decision means affirming the principles that underpin both market confidence and good governance, staying true to the Canada many of us look to as a model.

 

About the author: Derk Oldenburg is a former Netherlands Deputy Permanent Representative to the European Union and Managing Director for Public Policy at Liberty Global. He teaches at the University of Maastricht and the Hertie School of Governance in Berlin and works with WeltWert Insights, a geopolitical consultancy group.