Should We Disband the CRTC? A Closer Look at Its Relevance Today

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), Canada’s telecommunications regulator, has been a cornerstone of the country’s media and communication landscape for decades. However, growing criticism and calls for reform have prompted a deeper inquiry into whether this governing body is still relevant in today’s rapidly evolving digital and telecommunications environment.

The Origins and Purpose of the CRTC

Founded in a different era, the CRTC was designed to regulate traditional telecommunication monopolies and oversee Canada’s broadcasting system. Much like its U.S. counterpart, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the CRTC was established to ensure fairness, competition, and accessibility across increasingly critical infrastructure. But as the telecommunications monopoly it was created to oversee has largely disappeared, some argue its primary role has diminished. What, then, justifies its continued existence?

Critics of the CRTC often point to inefficiencies, bureaucratic overlap, and what they consider outdated regulations. For instance, existing bodies within the federal government, such as Industry Canada, already handle overlapping functions, rendering the CRTC’s involvement redundant in some areas. Moreover, recent legislative changes have added new responsibilities to the CRTC, such as regulating online streaming platforms and distributing funds to news organizations—a shift that some claim stretches its original mandate beyond recognition.

Lessons From the FCC and the Case for Reform

The debate surrounding the CRTC echoes concerns raised about the FCC. Mark Jamison, a prominent U.S. policy expert, has argued for disbanding the FCC, citing political interference and a loss of independence. He notes the FCC has become a political tool, emphasizing incidents like the 2015 net neutrality decision, which he argues was heavily influenced by the White House rather than rooted in sound economic principles. This critique aligns with similar concerns about the CRTC, which has faced criticism for lacking transparency and operating without sufficient accountability.

One significant takeaway from Professor Jamison’s arguments is the need to evaluate which regulatory functions are still necessary and whether they could be better managed by other agencies. For example, spectrum management and universal service subsidies are commonly cited as areas that do not require independent oversight. In the Canadian context, the question becomes: Are we better served by consolidating these functions within existing government departments or industry-specific bodies?

A Call for Comprehensive Review and Modernization

The Canadian government itself has also called for reform. A 2020 Policy Direction to the CRTC explicitly highlighted the need for transparency, evidence-based decision-making, and continuous review of its functions—guiding principles that should have been implicit, yet were formally mandated to address growing criticism. Additionally, Canada’s Telecom Act, enacted in 1993, and the Broadcasting Act, dating back to 1991, are now three decades old and increasingly unfit to handle the challenges of the modern digital ecosystem. The case for a comprehensive review could not be clearer.

As we approach the 20th anniversary of the Telecom Policy Review Panel, it is past time for Canada to evaluate not only the structure of the CRTC but also its place within a broader strategy for regulating the digital sector. Streamlining overlapping functions, modernizing legislation, and ensuring independence are critical steps toward a regulatory framework capable of fostering innovation while protecting consumer interests.

Is Disbanding the Solution?

Rather than outright disbandment, there may be a more measured solution: restructuring. By narrowing the scope of the CRTC to the most essential functions, such as mediating competition and protecting consumer rights, we can create a more efficient, focused regulatory body. Simultaneously, assigning non-core responsibilities—such as streaming service regulation and funding allocations—to other specialized agencies could reduce duplication and improve outcomes.

Ultimately, the CRTC’s future must align with the realities of today’s fast-changing telecommunications landscape. Guided by evidence, transparency, and a commitment to modernization, Canada can pave the way for a regulatory regime that fulfills its original promise while adapting to new challenges. The question is not just whether to disband the CRTC, but how to reshape it to remain relevant and effective in the 21st century.