Consumers to benefit from wholesale fibre access to Internet

PIAC supports CRTC decision to mandate wholesale access to high-speed access services including FTTH
OTTAWA, July 22, 2015 – The Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) supports a decision made by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) today to require incumbent phone and cable companies to make their high-speed Internet facilities, including fibre-to-the-home, available to competing service providers who wish to offer telecommunications services to Canadian consumers.
“We are pleased that the CRTC has required competitor access to fibre-to-the-home, which is likely to grow in consumer demand as Canadians expect and need higher Internet speeds,” said John Lawford, Executive Director and Counsel to PIAC. “We hope the decision will ensure competition at the retail level which will provide consumers with more choice and better prices for broadband.”
The CRTC decision requires incumbent telephone and cable companies to provide “disaggregated” wholesale high-speed access services, including fibre, to competitors. The CRTC disagreed with incumbent carriers that wireline Internet services could now be substituted by wireless or satellite services and held instead that wireline services will be more efficient now and into the future.
“The CRTC has boldly revised wholesale internet and telephone access market,” said Jean-François Léger, Counsel to PIAC. “While the details have yet to be settled, it appears the Commission has opted for a new approach that requires and expects more investment in fibre and transport by both incumbents and smaller competitors.”
In a public hearing last fall, PIAC and the Consumers’ Association of Canada (CAC) argued that consumers would benefit from mandated open access to the facilities of incumbent telecommunications services providers – including fibre-to-the-home – because it would encourage more competition, more choice, and more affordable pricing at the retail level for broadband now and into the future. PIAC and CAC also argued that requiring access to “essential” wholesale internet connectivity would create more retail competition and would in fact spur greater innovation and investment in broadband networks.
For more information, please contact:
John Lawford
General Counsel and Executive Director
Public Interest Advocacy Centre
(613) 562-4002×25
(613) 447-8125 (cell)
jlawford@piac.ca
www.piac.ca
Jean-François Léger
Counsel to CAC-PIAC
(613) 562-4002 x29
jfleger@piac.ca
www.piac.ca

All Canadians should have fast, affordable internet access

Affordable Access Coalition tells CRTC that all Canadians entitled to at least 5 Mbps today and 25 Mbps by 2020, and proposes subsidies to achieve those goals
OTTAWA, July 14, 2015 – The Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) today filed arguments in the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission’s (CRTC) “Review of basic telecommunications” hearing arguing all Canadians, no matter where they live, have a right to broadband internet today and much faster broadband by 2020, and that low-income Canadians should be financially supported with a subsidy to help them afford any basic telecommunications service.
“The CRTC has an important opportunity to make sure all Canadians, regardless of where they live and what their socio-economic status, can have access to the same standard of internet and telephone service that most Canadians already have”, said John Lawford, Executive Director and General Counsel at PIAC.
The proposals were filed as part of a submission to the CRTC in its broad review of basic telecommunications services in Canada, including whether broadband (i.e., high speed internet access) should be considered “basic telecommunications services” and therefore available to all Canadians, and whether funding support (i.e., subsidies) are necessary to make sure all Canadians have access to basic telecom services.
“There should be no question that broadband, like home telephone service, is a ‘basic’ telecommunications service that all Canadians should have access to so that they are able to participate in Canadian society and the digital economy,” said Geoff White, Counsel to the coalition.
PIAC filed its proposals as part of a coalition with other organizations, named the Affordable Access Coalition (AAC). The other organizations are:

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, Canada (ACORN Canada)
The Consumers’ Association of Canada;
The Council of Senior Citizens’ Organizations of British Columbia; and
The National Pensioners Federation.

Supported by an Environics survey of 1,000 Canadians, and a report from an expert on how other jurisdictions ensure all of their citizens have access to affordable telecommunications services, the Affordable Access Coalition argued that the legal standard for broadband speed at the household level today is already 5 megabits per second (Mbps) download speed. The AAC anticipates this standard may easily be 25 Mbps by 2020. Yet the coalition’s evidence suggests that not all Canadians have access to speeds that they need to meaningfully participate in society, either because broadband is not available where they live, or because it is unaffordable to low-income Canadians. The AAC therefore proposed two subsidies to support broadband availability and affordability. The “Access proposal” will result in a stable amount of funding to deploy broadband to un-served and under-served areas in Canada. The “Affordability proposal” will provide low-income Canadians with a monthly subsidy to use on the telecommunications service of their choice (broadband, home phone or cellphone service) and from the service provider of their choice.
A copy of the Affordable Access Coalition’s full intervention can be found here.
For more information please contact:
Geoff White
Counsel to the Affordable Access Coalition
(613) 562-4002 ×24
gwhite@piac.ca
John Lawford
Executive Director & General Counsel
Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC)
(613) 562-4002 ×25
lawford@piac.ca
www.piac.ca

Consumers the winners as wholesale wireless competition enabled by CRTC

Ottawa – Canadian cellphone customers are the winners after a decision of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) today to regulate the rates charged by Bell, TELUS and Rogers to smaller wireless providers to roam on their networks, said the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC).
The CRTC’s decision results from a recent public hearing on rules governing “wholesale” arrangements – how large wireless service providers must deal with smaller competitors in terms of roaming arrangements, tower-sharing, and other measures to promote competition in Canada’s wireless market.
In today’s decision, the CRTC explicitly set interim rates for roaming and conditions of access for competitors to the networks of the “Big Three” wireless companies (Bell, Rogers and TELUS). The CRTC said these companies have the ability and incentive to act anti-competitively in their provision of a number of essential wholesale “network access services” to other smaller wireless providers, which ultimately affects retail customers and competition overall. The CRTC will hold another hearing to set final rates this fall.
“Mobile wireless services constitute the largest component of Canadians’ spending on telecommunications services,” said John Lawford, Executive Director and General Counsel for PIAC. “The interim rate set for roaming access may still be too high; however, we believe that the costs-based rate which the CRTC expects to be in place later this fall will finally allow smaller competitors offer alternatives to the Big Three.”
“After years of debate over what most Canadians already know about the state of competition in the wireless market, this is a long-overdue recognition that competition in the Canadian wireless market is lacking”, said Jean-François Léger, Counsel to PIAC. “Today’s decision is therefore a positive step forward in the pursuit of more wireless competition in Canada.”
PIAC participated in the CRTC review of wholesale mobile wireless services, in a coalition with other organizations named the Groups for the Public Interest. The Groups also included the:

Consumers’ Association of Canada;
Council of Senior Citizens’ Organizations of British Columbia; and
National Pensioners Federation.

For more information:

John Lawford
General Counsel and Executive Director
Public Interest Advocacy Centre
(613) 562-4002×25
(613) 447-8125 (cell)
jlawford@piac.ca

Jean-François Léger
Counsel to PIAC-CAC
(613) 562-4002 x29
(613) 235-1781
jfleger@piac.ca

Public Interest Advocacy Centre 2016-2017 Articling Position

Name and Location of Organization:
Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC)
1204-ONE Nicholas Street, Ottawa, ON, K1N 7B7
For Articling Year: 2016-2017
Deadline for Application: May 19, 2015
Interviews the weeks of: May 25 and June 1, 2015
Offers will be made: June 17, 2015
Description of Organization and Areas of Law:
The Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) was federally incorporated in 1976 as a non-profit corporation in 1976 and has charitable status for tax purposes.
The organization’s purpose is to provide representation, research and advocacy on behalf of those elements of the public interest that would otherwise be unable to be adequately heard before courts, tribunals, and decision-makers. PIAC has tried to focus its mandate on issues arising from the delivery of important public services including telecommunications, broadcasting, competition law, energy, financial services, and transportation. PIAC seeks to represent and advocate on behalf of ordinary consumers, in particular vulnerable consumers, concerning the rates, policies, rules and regulations associated with the delivery of these services with a view to ensuring principles of access and affordability and fair treatment for the constituencies it tries to serve.
PIAC’s work takes a variety of forms. First, the lawyers of PIAC represent organizations whose membership serves our target constituencies before boards and tribunals where the industries delivering such services are regulated, These organizations include the Canada Without Poverty (formerly NAPO), the Vulnerable Energy Consumers Coalition, the Consumers Association of Canada, the Ontario Council of Senior Citizens Organizations, National Pensioners and Senior Citizens Federation, Option consommateurs, Union de Consommateurs, and Rural Dignity of Canada among others. PIAC’s most significant commitments for such representation occur before the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission and the Ontario Energy Board where PIAC lawyers will be full participants in administrative proceedings including the presentation of evidence, cross-examination of witnesses and the making of submissions.
Because the delivery of the public services touches upon consideration of other important legal and policy matters, PIAC has also developed expertise and is frequently involved in funded and unfunded work (approximately 20% of PIAC’s work is unfunded) representing its constituencies in competition law and practice, Foundation of Ontario electronic commerce, privacy, multilateral agreements, and general issues of consumer protection.
PIAC carries out its work outside the hearing room in numerous ways. Its extensive studies and reports associated with the above are published and distributed to policy makers and the general public through its web site. PIAC staff participate in discussions with government officials, other industry stakeholders, other public interest communities, as well as groups representing its own constituencies to attempt to secure rights, rules, policies or consensus that will advance the interests of the communities that PIAC serves. PIAC frequently attends before parliamentary and legislative committees to pursue these same goals in legislation. Finally, PIAC’s staff are active in attempting to present in the media, a coherent defense of those communities’ position when the delivery of important public services are in issue.
Description of Responsibilities:
(a) Research and writing on legal and policy issues to support studies and reports of the Centre;
(b) Research and writing to support regulatory interventions in tribunals;
(c) Assistance and attendance with PIAC counsel for tribunal work, meetings with government officials and presentation before parliamentary committees;
(d) Participation in discussions of advocacy strategy and position with Counsel and Centre clients
Salary/benefits: $51,000 for the articling term, LTD and Extended Medical and Dental plus paid vacation
Application includes:

Resume
Cover letter
Undergrad transcripts
Law transcripts
Letters of reference

Applications should be addressed to:
John Lawford
Executive Director and General Counsel
Public Interest Advocacy Centre
Ottawa, ON, K1N 7B7
Fax No. 613 562-0007
Email to: dbrady@piac.ca
Students will be interviewed between May 25-29 through to June 1-5, 2015 with a view to extending an offer on June 17, 2015.
Please note: A copy of your application will reside with the Organization providing the articling position, and another will stay with the Law Foundation for the purposes of statistical analysis and feedback on the program.
This position has been made available through The Law Foundation of Ontario Public Interest Articling Fellowships program.

Consumers Can Expect New “Television Code” and a TV Service Ombudsman

PIAC supports CRTC decision to create a Television Service Provider Code of Conduct for TV subscribers
OTTAWA, March 26, 2015 – The Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) commends the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) for its decision to initiate a proceeding to create a code of conduct for all cable, satellite and IPTV television service providers and to provide an independent ombudsman for television service complaints.
At the CRTC’s Let’s Talk TV hearing last September, PIAC in a coalition with other public interest organizations argued that Canadian television subscribers had no independent ombudsman to turn to in a dispute with their television service provider and that a “Television Code” would be beneficial for all consumers.
“An ombudsman for television service has been long needed, especially after the creation of the CCTS for telecom services, and a Television Code will help consumers know what their rights are in their relationship with their TV service provider,” said John Lawford, Executive Director and Counsel to PIAC. “PIAC looks forward to participating and advocating on behalf of Canadian consumers in the upcoming consultation.”
The CRTC will receive comments on Broadcasting Notice of Consultation 2015-105 until May 25, 2015. PIAC encourages all Canadians to participate and share their views online here or by writing to the Secretary General, CRTC, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0N2.
PIAC participated in Let’s Talk TV in a coalition with other organizations named the Groups for the Public Interest. The Groups also included the:

Canadian Ethnocultural Council;
Consumers’ Association of Canada;
Council of Senior Citizens’ Organizations of British Columbia;
National Pensioners Federation; and
Option consommateurs.

For more information please contact:
John Lawford
Executive Director & General Counsel
Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC)
(613) 562-4002 ×25
Mobile: (613) 447-8125
lawford@piac.ca
www.piac.ca

Alysia Lau
Legal Counsel
Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC)
(613) 562-4002 ×38
Mobile: (613) 400-9145
alau@piac.ca
www.piac.ca

– 30 –

Canada Needs Definition of Affordable Communications

New PIAC report: “No Consumer Left Behind: A Canadian Affordability Framework for Communications Services in a Digital Age”
OTTAWA, March 23, 2015 – Canadians need a clear definition of affordability of their communications services if they wish to realize the full potential of these services to connect them to Canadian society, concludes a new report released today by the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC). In the report “No Consumer Left Behind: A Canadian Affordability Framework for Communications Services in a Digital Age”, PIAC surveys existing legal and policy explorations of how much Canadians can afford to pay for their communications services (wireline and wireless telephone, broadband Internet and broadcasting), and finds that Canada needs a comprehensive statement of affordability in order to move towards universal communications for Canadians.
“Canada has been silent on what affordable communications services means for too long,” noted John Lawford, PIAC’s Executive Director and General Counsel and co-author of the report. “We need to start the conversation – and to do that we need to know what affordability really means to low-income consumers.”
As part of the report, PIAC surveyed affordability regulations and policies in other countries but focused on understanding the Canadian consumer’s perspective on the affordability of communications services through:

Focus groups held with members of ACORN Canada, a national advocacy organization of low and moderate income families;
Interviews with local organizations who worked with low-income clients on a day-to-day basis; and
Aggregate data of low-income consumers gathered from Credit Canada Debt Solutions.

“Lower income Canadians told us they need communications to fully participate in society, now more than ever,” said Alysia Lau, PIAC Legal Counsel and co-author of the report. “They are trying to cope, but they also need more control over what they spend, and more choice of services.”
The report recommends that Canada establish an explicit, enforceable universal service obligation for telecommunications and broadcasting services, and require communications services to be affordable to all Canadians.
The report finds that “affordability” must be carefully defined for this purpose. It must be relative – that is, consumers should not have to sacrifice or restrict purchasing other essential services such as heating, clothing or food in order to afford monthly communications services. Affordability should respect Canadians’ needs for control over their costs and choice of communications services. In addition, the report recommended that the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) undertake quantitative research on affordability on a yearly basis and make the findings and data public.
The full report in English:
PIAC No Consumer Left Behind – Final Report English
The full report in French:
PIAC No Consumer Left Behind – Final Report French
PIAC received funding from Industry Canada’s Contributions Program for Non-Profit Consumer and Voluntary Organizations to prepare the report. The views expressed in the report are not necessarily those of Industry Canada or the Government of Canada.
For more information please contact:
John Lawford
Executive Director & General Counsel
Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC)
(613) 562-4002 ×25
Mobile: (613) 447-8125
lawford@piac.ca
www.piac.ca

Alysia Lau
Legal Counsel
Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC)
(613) 562-4002 ×38
alau@piac.ca
www.piac.ca

– 30 –

Statement from PIAC regarding OTT services in CRTC's TalkTV CanCon decision

PIAC-CAC are skeptical that today’s CRTC’s TalkTV CanCon decision will have the effect of motivating Bell, and Rogers and Shaw, to make their content available online to every Canadian as a true “over-the-top” service instead of requiring Canadians to (a) buy a BDU subscription (Bell’s Crave) or (b) or an internet or BDU subscription (Rogers or Shaw’s Shomi).
PIAC-CAC challenged that tied selling as basically arbitraging different sets of rules to favour themselves in a way that harms competition and consumer choice at a time when Canadians want more and more control over what they watch, and how they watch it. (PIAC-CAC had characterized Shomi as “a subscription-based online streaming service tied to a specific ISP or BDU service or class of BDU services“, and CraveTV as a “a subscription-based online streaming service tied to a class of BDU services.”)
The Commission acknowledged in its broader TV framework decision today that it may not be clear what rules apply to these types of services, which is something PIAC-CAC’s applications intended to elicit and ultimately resolve. While the CRTC, in a separate letter, “returned” PIAC-CAC’s complaints, i.e., avoided providing a ruling, PIAC-CAC believe their complaints have highlighted ongoing and growing tensions between the old TV distribution models and new ones, and tensions between the two statutes governing broadcasting (TV) and telecom (internet) in Canada.
The Commission’s proposed approach to this in today’s decision appears to be to have three categories of video-on-demand services that TV providers can adopt – the traditional one accessed through with a BDU subscription, the licence-exempt “over-the-top” service (accessible via any internet connection), and a third, new “hybrid” model which allows BDUs to offer the service exclusively to only their BDU customers so long as the service is also available to anyone with an internet connection (thus providing a competitive differentiator to the BDU service).
What today’s decision does not do is declare that Bell, Rogers and Shaw are such “hybrids”, and therefore it appears that the Commission will allow the closed, tied model to continue. The CRTC appears to be trying to provide an incentive to become a hybrid VOD – if you do that, you don’t have to abide by the traditional licensing requirements (namely CanCon financial obligations). It’s a way to lighten the financial burden on those services in exchange for a requirement to make it available online.
Although the Commission’s emphasis in this particular decision is on helping VOD services compete on an “equal footing” with online video services, PIAC-CAC believe that online video services, particularly small competitors, are the ones that face a structural disadvantage against the large, vertically integrated companies (owning both broadcasting content and internet access services) implicated in today’s decision. In PIAC-CAC’s view, that disadvantage harms competition and consumer choice. PIAC-CAC are therefore considering whether to bring fresh applications, as the CRTC suggested they could in light of these decisions. PIAC-CAC also encourage Canadians to share their views on these matters by emailing piac@piac.ca, and by tweeting #Canadians4OTT.

The Way Forward Unclear to Online Video Consumers

PIAC concerned that CRTC “Talk TV” decision on Canadian content permits Internet-delivered services to require subscription to expensive TV offerings
OTTAWA, March 12, 2015 – The Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) today expressed concern that Canadians wishing to access new online video services such as CraveTV and shomi will continue to be shut out from such services unless they subscribe to affiliated subscription TV services.
“Bell’s CraveTV and Rogers and Shaw’s shomi services, despite the CRTC’s decision today, are able to continue to make you sign up for an expensive subscription cable or IPTV package if you want access to the “over-the-top” products, said John Lawford, Executive Director and Counsel to PIAC.
The latest “Talk TV” decision released today by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), creates a new category of “exempt hybrid video on demand” services under which licensees must offer their Internet-delivered service to all Canadians, regardless of whether they have a TV service subscription. However, the CRTC has allowed a loophole to persist where services like CraveTV and shomi can avoid that requirement.
PIAC and the Consumers’ Association of Canada (CAC) had filed two applications with the CRTC asking that that loophole be closed. Today, the CRTC closed the PIAC-CAC applications, referencing instead the new hybrid video on demand (HVOD) exemption while at the same time essentially preserving the status quo.
“The CRTC today has avoided the issue of tying subscription TV services to Netflix-fighting OTT services,” said Geoff White, Counsel to PIAC on the PIAC-CAC application. “We are skeptical that any competitors to these services will choose the new HVOD exemption model that CRTC created today and it will remain very hard for any competitors to catch up to the head start Bell, Rogers, Shaw and their partners have thanks to the loophole the CRTC has left in place.”
Attached is a statement to the public from PIAC calling upon them to comment on the CRTC’s decision on OTT services. PIAC will consider re-applying for consideration of its application, in part with any public input.
PIAC also participated in Let’s Talk TV in a coalition with other organizations named the Groups for the Public Interest. The Groups also included the:

Canadian Ethnocultural Council;
Consumers’ Association of Canada;
Council of Senior Citizens’ Organizations of British Columbia;
National Pensioners Federation; and
Option consommateurs.

The CRTC also introduced regulatory changes today for Canadian television content, emphasizing promotion, quality over quantity of Canadian programming, and reliance on market forces. PIAC generally supports the new changes in particular those – including the elimination of genre protection – directed towards maximizing consumer choice and flexibility.
At the same time, broadcasters will continue to have obligations to support Canadian programming. A 2014 poll commissioned by PIAC and filed during the Let’s Talk TV proceeding showed that 83% of Canadians agreed broadcasters should be required to help promote and market Canadian programs, and that 79% agreed broadcasters should be required to redirect a percentage of their revenues to funding Canadian production. However, 80% of Canadians also agreed that broadcasters should have to air a certain number of original Canadian programs and, in particular, programs from various regions across Canada. Therefore, PIAC will continue to monitor and advocate for policies which ensure that television programming will continue to serve Canadians, in particular minority groups such as ethnocultural communities, Aboriginal groups, Canadians with disabilities, and official language minority communities.
For more information please contact:
John Lawford
Executive Director & General Counsel
Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC)
(613) 562-4002 ×25
Mobile (613) 447-8125
lawford@piac.ca
www.piac.ca

Geoff White
Counsel to PIAC-CAC
(613) 562-4002 ×24
gwhite@piac.ca

Alysia Lau
Legal Counsel
Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC)
(613) 562-4002 ×38
alau@piac.ca
www.piac.ca

Comments of the Public Interest Advocacy Centre on the Consultation on Repurposing the 600 MHz Band

Industry Canada is consulting on closely following a U.S. initiative to repurpose radiofrequency spectrum currently used for over-the-air (OTA) broadcasting for use by wireless service providers. PIAC submitted its initial comments on February 26.

In PIAC’s view, OTA broadcasting is an affordable, accessible alternative to costly distribution platforms which continue to increase in price for consumers. As an alternative to traditional and online delivery models, OTA can provide competitive stimulus to vertically integrated incumbent broadcasters. OTA, while possibly perceived as ‘old’ technology, holds great technological promise in terms of offering high signal quality, and multiplexing a number of distinct broadcasting offerings within one channel. In PIAC’s view, foreclosing on that promise would be at odds with the CRTC’s recent affirmation of OTA’s importance. It would also signal that commercial mobile spectrum specifically, and online access, more generally, is the future of broadcasting consumption, which PIAC believes should not be a foregone conclusion in light of ongoing broadband affordability and accessibility challenges in Canada. To the extent Canada will follow the U.S. in the 600 MHz spectrum conversion from broadcasting spectrum to commercial mobile spectrum, then Industry Canada should make efforts to ease the transition to new frequencies for OTA stations and actively assist the public in making this transition. In either case, PIAC encourages Industry Canada, alongside the CRTC, to develop an OTA TV policy framework that provides OTA broadcasting (and its viewers) with a stable future, rather than serial re-assignments to accommodate for mobile spectrum displacement.

PIAC-CAC Challenge Tied Selling of Canadian online streaming services “CraveTV” and “shomi”

The Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) and the Consumers’ Association of Canada (CAC, together PIAC-CAC) filed two applications with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (the CRTC) today, challenging the tied selling of two online streaming services linked to the consumption of other telecommunications or broadcasting services.
In one application, PIAC-CAC have challenged whether Rogers and Shaw, through their Shomi Partnership joint venture, can lawfully tie access to their Shomi streaming service to consumption of a Rogers or Shaw internet access or TV subscription.
In the other application, PIAC-CAC have challenged whether Bell can restrict access to its CraveTV streaming service to those Canadians who have a TV subscription.
“The tied selling of streaming services, designed to favour legacy business models and to discriminate against customers who wish to only view programming through an internet service provider of their choice, is something PIAC-CAC believe cannot be supported in the current rules, nor by Canada’s broadcasting policy objectives”, said Geoffrey White, counsel to PIAC-CAC.
“We are hoping to preserve an open internet, and have the CRTC tell large telecom and broadcasting conglomerates that they should not be allowed to abuse regulatory distinctions at the expense of Canadians”, said John Lawford, Executive Director and General Counsel for PIAC.
A copy of the two applications is linked here:
PIAC-CAC Part 1 – CraveTV – Application
PIAC-CAC PART I – SHOMI – Application

For more information:
Geoffrey White
Counsel to PIAC-CAC
(613) 612-1190
gwhite@piac.ca
John Lawford
General Counsel and Executive Director
Public Interest Advocacy Centre
(613) 562-4002×25
(613) 447-8125 (cell)
jlawford@piac.ca