That's a very broad and, at the same time, quite fundamental question. I'll try to answer it in 30 seconds or so.
The process is essentially the one the CRTC followed in the context of the present act. That act provides for a process before abolishing regulation. In our view, the CRTC did what it had to do, that is to say it held a complicated hearing at which many briefs were submitted, where significant evidence was filed on the way in which you move from a regulated to an unregulated environment for local telecommunications services.
That work is essentially done. We're now seeing the accelerated deployment of competition in a number of markets. We should stick to the game plan and allow the process to take its course. We've practically reached the end of the process.
What is the point in reinventing the wheel and trying to question how we should achieve the final result. The regulatory authorities of the world have asked themselves the same questions, come up against the same problems and, strangely, drawn the same conclusions. There is a concept called dominant market position. We must ensure, market by market, that dominance is no longer a problem, before proceeding with regulation. That's the general principle.
In practice, that means that someone must verify, with supporting evidence, what is going on in each relevant market, whether it's in Saint-Georges-de-Beauce, Sept-Îles or Roberval. That's the heart of the matter.