As I mentioned in response to Mr. McTeague's question, subsections 34(1) and 34(3) both call on the CRTC to find, as a fact, that there is competition present sufficient to protect the interest of users before granting an order of forbearance to an incumbent, a former monopoly provider, that applies to be deregulated from the retail business. So on a case-by-case basis, it's a statutory obligation of the CRTC to look at the situation, find competition, grant forbearance.
This order says, don't do that. It says, count providers. If there's more than one facilities-based provider offering service, then that's sufficient. You then must grant forbearance. Pay no attention to the market power of the incumbent; pay no attention to the other indicia of market power, which is what competition is all about--if those providers are offering service, that's sufficient. If the incumbent provider has 95% of the market, and there's one other provider with 2% and another with 3%, you must deregulate. You can't look at any further assessment of market power. We say that is effectively repealing section 34 by executive order, which would be really ultra vires the executive branch.