The CRTC has denied a request by several carriers to increase the prices of basic cable prices in line with inflation.

The application was first made by Bell, Cogeco, Eastlink and SaskTel in Jan. 2022. It requested that the maximum retail price for basic cable packages be raised to $28 per month, from the $25 cap first set in 2016. The carriers also requested that the price cap be adjusted every year, based on the annual consumer price index.

The carriers argued that the adjustment was necessary to ensure that the price of basic services “does not decline over time” when inflation is taken into account. It would also create rate regulations for BDUs that would be consistent with what exists for telecommunications providers.

Rogers, Corus, Pelmorex, Access Communications Co-operative and the Canadian Communication Systems Alliance all filed interventions in favour of the application. Most of the applications opposed came from individual Canadians, though the group also included the Consumer Association of Saskatchewan, PIAC-NPF, the Forum on Research and Policy in Communications, Quebec’s Ministère de la culture et des communications, the Independent Broadcast Group and Anthem Sports and Entertainment.

However, the CRTC denied the application, saying the applicants did not submit evidence showing that the $25 cap was not economically viable for them, or that their costs of running a basic cable service have increased. The applicants point to wholesale fees that have increased since 2016, but the CRTC said that those only accounted for 0.45% of total BDU expenditures, which did not justify a 12% price increase.

The CRTC also said that, regardless of whether or not it was viable for carriers, the basic cable service is designed to benefit the consumer in a marketplace where carriers “have multiple options to recoup their costs” with other services outside of the relatively small basic package.

As such, it did not find that the need to increase prices outweighed the potential harms for Canadians. Several of those who submitted in opposition of the application also said that a price increase would have a bigger negative impact on lower-income Canadians, especially those living in rural areas with poor internet service, who are less able to supplement their television packages with online services.