Yes. The Competition Bureau, when they have a settlement with merging companies, can put in conditions. They can follow up usually up to five years afterward. They could dream up any conditions to put on here.
I would just say, on the efficiencies defence, the Competition Bureau could win that as well. If prices go up in the entire industry, that's what's called a dead-weight loss and that goes on the consumer side of the scale of this efficiencies balance. Also, if the shareholders of Rogers get a lot more money, well, who owns shares in Canada? It tends to be the people in the top quintile of income. That's counted as a loss to lower-income Canadians. That goes on the consumer side of the scale too.
The Competition Bureau could conclude that the efficiencies are actually on the consumer side and say no to the deal. They did that with Bell MTS, but at the end they brokered this fig-leaf deal with putting on Xplornet, which was a travesty. They could be taking a hard line. Your committee, if they mention something about the efficiencies defence, could give a little steel in the spine of the Competition Bureau.