Industry committee  From a consumer point of view, it's very important that you make it clear to people, through your decision or your report, that you care how much they pay for Internet; you understand how much they rely on it; and when things get seriously out of whack, whether there's a regulator or not, you will respond in whatever way is appropriate so they have that access.

Industry committee  I went through a hearing recently about getting Internet out to the rural areas, determining whether satellite was affordable, and whether other technologies like WiMax could work. They can. They haven't been really pushed. When Bell got money from the deferral accounts, which was leftover money from, we think, overcharging subscribers some years ago, they first put DSL out as an option.

Industry committee  Mr. Masse also touched on a couple of ideas. You can be quite aggressive. I don't think this would happen in Canada, but you could require the large incumbents to cut off their network arm, their retail arm, and have two separate ones. I don't think we need to go that far. What you need to have is strict wholesale rules where the access is as high in the network as possible, so that the service differentiation can start as close to the Internet as possible.

Industry committee  I looked at the telecom notice of consultation that came out today, and as Rocky said earlier, I found it very leading, in the sense that it's talking about a general rule that ordinary consumers, whether they're those of the small ISPs or not, shouldn't have to pay for the heavy users.

Industry committee  If by this model you mean we have what I think Harvard's Berkman Center said was a lukewarm effort at wholesale regulation, then yes, this model doesn't work. If you're strict about your wholesale regulation, you say cost-based and the wholesalers can do whatever they want, then I think it may work fine.

Industry committee  The caps have never been in place. In the United States there were practically citizen revolts there when they tried to be implemented by the cable DSL Internet providers. There is very little competition in Canada. The only competition you have is from small ISPs with a wholesale access, and that is the only way to prise this open.

Industry committee  The peak period is what should be driving this whole debate. You only have problems when your capacity is full. It doesn't matter who is causing it, it just has to be managed. The CRTC said, in the traffic management decision, first, we want carriers to build their networks up; second, we want them to use economic measures; and third, we want them to throttle, if they have to.

Industry committee  You're asking me how the CRTC explains it, or...?

Industry committee  There should be a wholesale market so there is competition. Otherwise, first, you have only baby Bells, if I can put it that way, that are reselling exactly the same thing. Second, if I am a wholesaler, it is up to me to decide how I earn my money. If it is from unlimited access and the market supports that, fine.

Industry committee  Sure. Usage-based billing, as it becomes widespread, asks people to restrict their usage of bandwidth. And it enforces it with a very effective thing, and that's by price. And it is effective because people do reduce their bandwidth when they get the monthly bill. But if you are trying to sell high-bandwidth services, that will make it very difficult for you to attract capital because anyone you go to—if you're not already making a deal with Bell or with one of the cable providers where it doesn't count towards your capital—the first question from a banker, I'm sure, would be, “So how are you going to get this through the network?

Industry committee  Part of the telecom policy review panel's recommendations were taken and part were not. That one about the competition telecom tribunal was not taken up. I think it would have helped, because the kind of expertise you need in this case needs to have more competition law informing it.

Industry committee  The policy direction has caused much consternation among consumers, and I think you will continue to see problems like this bubble up to the political level if it stays completely as is.

Industry committee  There are two courses. One is revoke the policy direction. There have been a number of decisions on social measures that we find very anti-consumer-protective, and also have not come through on the competition side. The other way of doing it is to clarify--again--what it means, and the interpretation, unfortunately, that seems to have come out of the policy direction is that there has to be this competitive neutrality.

Industry committee  Thank you. Mr. Chair, committee members, Mr. Clerk and staff, my name is John Lawford and I am counsel at the Public Interest Advocacy Centre, PIAC. With me is Janet Lo, also counsel at PIAC. We are here today to represent PIAC and the Consumers' Association of Canada in your study of usage-based billing and its treatment by the CRTC.

Industry committee  Bell says that few customers will be affected by across-the-board usage-based billing: only 2% of users. This is misinformation. All customers, whether they take their Internet service from Bell, Telus, a cable company like Shaw or Rogers, or an independent ISP, such as TekSavvy or those others who are here today, are deeply affected.