Thank you, Mr. Chair.
This is obviously an issue that is very complex, and it will take some time for the government to look at particular options, particular models, and also to come forward with a process and a timeline for consulting with industry on a path forward on this issue.
I think in general, when we look abroad, we see different regulatory models. Different countries have different net telecommunications networks that have quite different features, so that drives them to different regulatory models. In the case of foreign investment in particular, the vast majority of OECD countries have completely lifted their foreign investment regulations, but a small number maintain them on their incumbent telephone providers. What we do see subsequent to the lifting of that, if we look over time at what happened after those restrictions were lifted and if we look over space—in other words, looking at Canada's situation compared to others—is we do see that most other OECD countries have at least one foreign wireless provider operating in their market. Often in the economic literature, those would sometimes be referred to as disruptive competitors who are in the market and really focus on providing low-price simple services for consumers. That's what we see in other countries.
Clearly that's not just a function of foreign investment restrictions. There is a whole regulatory framework around telecommunications. For example, the government's decision to set aside spectrum for new entrants into the wireless market in the advanced wireless spectrum option was a recognition of the potential benefits to consumers in encouraging new competitors to come into the Canadian market.