Once again, we have to wonder about the way that this decision was implemented to get this result. Indeed, speed matching did appear to make sense when the 2006 directive was implemented, whereby competitors were to have access to the same speed as incumbents. In this instance, we had a tangible, easy and obvious application of the directive to state that competitors must benefit from the same things. So sometimes the CRTC's interpretation of the decision is confusing and misleading, but at other times, it is applied properly. So we are somewhere between the two.
On February 10th, 2011. See this statement in context.