Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Today we have heard from quite a few experts. We're obviously looking at the whole convoluted, complicated situation that we're in. We're looking at a big merger here in Canada.
One thing I start thinking about is how we get the fundamentals right. We're looking, really, at competition as a whole across Canada. Why is competition important? It's because when we have competition, Canadians have choices. They have better service and better prices. That's evidently what should be at the top of all of our minds as parliamentarians right now, especially going through high inflation.
When we look at this, we hear from academics and from experts on the Competition Act who are saying they have done this or they have done the other. The fact of this case that I find most alarming and that concerns me is that Rogers, in looking to buy an asset or a competitor, was given carte blanche in picking who its competitor would be. Rogers, the number one market share holder in telecommunications in all of Canada, was allowed—and Shaw gave it the full authority—to freely go and pick who its competitor would be. Maybe more importantly, it was allowed to decide to pick who it wouldn't be dealing with.
Globalive is here. Distributel is another one, and there might have been others.
Mr. Lacavera, in your own words, do you feel that the divestiture process was fair?