Thank you very much for that question. The distribution network, in my view, does not get enough attention from the big three sectors. We tend to focus on generation. Today, we've been talking a lot about high-voltage transmission.
The challenge with distribution networks is that they're necessarily regulated because they have a franchise monopoly—you don't want dual competing grids—and that can distort incentives. Getting incentives right to do the cost-minimizing thing is always a challenge.
There are some concrete things we can look at. There's performance-based regulation, in which you're incentivizing non-wires alternatives—this might be cheaper than expanding the system. There is such a thing as total expenditure rate basing, rather than capital expenditure rate basing. We tend to allow only capital expenditures in rate base, which distorts decisions away from, say, operating expense, which can sometimes be cheaper. A totex rate basing is something that other jurisdictions have done.
There's one very niche thing. I brought over folks from the U.K. recently to Alberta—the regulator and companies—to learn from them on the distribution network. We can use telemetry technology in places where we don't have a full rollout of smart meters: meters that are capable of recording consumption at an hourly level, which is essential for demand flexibility measurement. You can meter off somebody's phone connection to your electric vehicle. These are things that are allowed in the U.K. It's almost skipping past the landline.
I'm not suggesting that we do full utility metering off telemetry, but for some of these flexibility programs, this would be an area for Measurement Canada to look at for potential relaxation. I think we could get a lot of gains if we were a bit more flexible there.