Merci, Monsieur Crête.
There are a couple of minutes left. I am actually going to take the next Conservative spot, as that's the chair's prerogative.
First of all, I think the main issue, if you try to get away from some of the jargon, is that you're almost looking at two approaches here. You're looking at an approach that says you have to rely on percentage of market power, for instance, which is the approach the CRTC takes with respect to forbearance for local telephony, which obviously impacts VOIP. Or you take an approach, which to me the minister is trying to do, that looks at whether there are actually competitive services available.
It seems to me from your answers and your presentation that you adopt the latter approach—at least in philosophy. Whether you would specifically advocate for that or not, I'm not saying.
So you've got the 25% market power on one side, and then on the other side you've got competition between three facilities, two wireline and one wireless.
If you look at the figures given by Mr. French, he talked about 11%, I believe, for COGECO, Vidéotron, Shaw, and Rogers; and then he talked about the 25% needed for the forbearance issue. If I just look at the city of Edmonton, a mid- to large-size city, you've got Telus providing local service, telephony, Internet, including ADSL; you've got Shaw for television, local telephony, and Internet through cable. You've got VOIP with Vonage. Vonage exists in Devon, a community of 7,000 outside the city of Edmonton, and in Leduc, a community of 17,000, You've got wireless, Telus, Bell, and Rogers. And yet I would suspect that Telus's share of the market is greater than 75% local telephony.
So if you take the first approach, you would actually not deregulate the market, and yet as a consumer in the city of Edmonton it would just seem to me common sense that in that situation—albeit perhaps not in a rural area—you would just say yes, that as a consumer I can switch to ADSL with Telus, or to Shaw and get my Internet that way, or I can switch back and forth on wireless if I don't like the Telus service or don't like the Bell service.
So it seems to me, and I just want to clarify this, that you favour the second approach, looking with common sense at the situation existing on the ground and saying yes, there are companies there that can provide services, rather than relying on a 25% market power figure, which to me seems increasingly unrealistic in the world we're dealing with in telecommunications.