It's the part that concerns “the CRTC should”. The obligation that the CRTC must meet to rely on market forces is already provided for by Parliament. The Governor in Council tells us that the CRTC should: “1(a)(i) rely on market forces to the maximum extent feasible...”
However, there is subparagraph 1(b)(ii)—and I don't want that to be binding on me with respect to the scope of section 8, which makes it possible to state these provisions—which concerns the CRTC's obligation to clarify the policy objective: “1(b)(ii) economic regulation, when required, should neither deter efficient competitive entry nor promote inefficient entry.”
Those are the elements we can't live with.
We also find the part concerning symmetrical implementation of non-economic regulation, that is symmetrical and neutral implementation from the standpoint of competition, very interesting. However, as regards the part clarifying the objective, it is not an obligation for the CRTC, but it's already making it one. In certain cases, it already respects these elements which are not an obligation. But why not clarify it? The possibility of doing that through the proposed direction should be studied, but some elements of its content are already being implemented by the CRTC.