With your permission, I'd like to add something.
It may have been Mr. Masse who raised this in previous meetings, but I think there's a concern, as we impose constraints or direct phone companies to take measures, that we need to be very attentive to: that those costs of implementing those measures are not immediately passed on to consumers. I think that's a very important point and one that we're paying close attention to.
Thus far, I have not seen any measures that the companies have introduced where they are saying, “We can protect you. We have a great new gadget approach that will get rid of most of the spam calls, and it's only an extra $2 a month on your cell bill or on your phone bill.”
We have not seen that. I can at least speak for myself to say I wouldn't be very supportive as a regulator of such an approach by the carriers. I think it is in their interest to address this, and they should compete with one another for their customers in part on how well they protect them and serve them, not just their quality of service or their coverage, but also in things like protecting them from unwanted communications. I think it's in their best interest, but also, we should make sure it's not at the expense of consumers.
I think that's part of what underlies that. I'm not being very subtle, but I can say that I would not be supportive of seeing.... Let me rephrase it: I have expectations that the industry should deal with this because it's in their best interest and the best interest of consumers.