September 12, 2001

Secretary General

Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission

Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0N2

SUBJECT: PRICE CAP REVIEW and RELATED ISSUES, PUBLIC NOTICE CRTC 2001-37

I am writing in response to the invitation to comment on changes proposed

by TELUS, which were described in the notice accompanying my most recent

Telus phone bill.

Deregulation of phone utilities was hailed by the government as a means of

increasing competition and reducing costs to telephone subscribers. The

immediate result of that action was to substantially increase costs for

local basic phone service, although costs of long distance calls decreased.

For residential subscribers who do not make many long distance calls, the

net effect was a considerable increase in their monthly bill, which was

especially hard on seniors, and those in low income brackets.

The proposed increase of $3 per month to a maximum of $35 per month for

residential users is ridiculous. My current monthly bill for Local

Services, without any rental equipment, is $23.86 plus $.58 for additional

charges (Provincial Network Fee plus Municipal Call Answering fee) is

$24.46. The total bill including taxes is $26.12. The proposed increase

amounts to nearly 50% in only 4 months!!!

Bearing in mind that my income change is not 50%, the

federal annual inflation target is about 2% and no salary increases or

related operating costs of Telus are anywhere near 50%, the proposed

rate increase is entirely unacceptable. It will cause particular hardship to

seniors and other low income phone subscribers, as phone service is

nowadays a necessity.

I also wish to protest any subsidization by residential users for the

Telus Service Improvement Plan for upgrades in under served communities.

There are phone service providers other than Telus and alternatives for

providing phone service in unserviced or under served communities other than by

traditional wire line technology. Some "third world" countries and parts

of China are acquiring their first telephone service by wireless and/or

satellite systems, which can be installed at a fraction of the cost of

conventional wire line techniques. This is a market that competition

was

supposed to address. If development of remote areas is a federal

objective, the federal government, not Telus residential subscribers,

should subsidize costs.

I feel that this id just a money grab on the part of Telus. They

continually nickel and dime customers for services which were previously

free and then turn around and eliminate some services. I am appalled that

they even have the nerve to consider this option.

Yours truly,

Laurel Jackson

#29 4936 Dalton Dr. N. W.

Calgary, Alberta

T3A 2E4

Laurel