The face-off between domestic and foreign telecommunications companies ‘is like a hockey game’ according to Alek Krstajic, CEO of upstart Public Mobile.

Domestic carriers play by the rules and are ‘allowed to put five players on the ice,’ he told MPs, appearing before parliament’s industry committee as hearings into foreign ownership limits continued on Tuesday. But allowing companies like Egyptian-financed Globalive — with their greater access to foreign capital — is like ‘allowing them to have six players on the ice.’

‘Capital is the life blood’ of the industry,’ Krstajic added, expressing concern that his company operated by the Canadian rules that a majority foreign-owned telco was not allowed.

‘Sometimes we apply the rules, sometimes we don’t apply the rules… sometimes we change the rules,’ he said, referring to Industry Minister Tony Clement’s overruling of the CRTC that opened the door for Globalive despite its Egyptian-based financier Orascom.

‘We want six players on the ice if that’s what’s allowed,’ he added.

Quebec MP Serge Cardin quipped that there might ‘be nine players on the ice soon’ if Canada allows greater foreign control of its telcos.

Bruce Kirby, Public Mobile’s VP of strategy, told Playback Daily after the hearings that the current limits on foreign investment only serve to ‘limit the sources of capital’ available to the telecom sector. Public Mobile would like to have the same opportunity as its new competitor to bring in massive foreign capital.

For its part, Globalive is happy to be in the game. Chief legal officer Simon Lockie notes that two previous panels, in 2003 and 2006, recommended that cabinet should be allowed, in the public interest, to waive restrictions on transactions.

‘So if it’s in the public interest, you let it go forward, and if it’s not, you don’t,’ he said after the hearings.

The proposed 49% cap on foreign investment is not ‘realistic or effective’ he added. ‘It doesn’t move the needle when it comes to attracting foreign capital, and even worse, it keeps the highly subjective ‘control in fact’ restrictions alive.

‘We need competition [in the sector] and we need capital on reasonable terms to fully realize our potential as a vigorous competitor to the ‘big three,” namely Bell, Telus and Rogers, he added.

During the hearings, Quebec MP Carole Lavallée re-introduced the issue of content, underlining that ‘there has to be a convergence between broadcasting and telecommunications. The one who controls access, controls content,’ she said, using ‘Tête à claque podcasts on our phones’ as an example of convergence. ‘The new business structure threatens the culture of Quebec and Canada.’

Neither Globalive nor Public Mobile want to see the thorny issue of content or the Broadcasting Act addressed alongside the Telecommunications Act during this process, although other players such as Telus have said it is necessary given the new realities of convergence.

A recent Harris/Decima poll said 68% of Canadians believe broadcasting and communications are too important to Canada’s national security and cultural sovereignty to allow foreign control of Canadian companies in these sectors.