Industry committee  No, clearly, some have more than others, and that's because of what economists I think would refer to as some of the economies of scale and scope and density that exist in the industry. Clearly, a larger player will have more of an advantage. It's just like the McLaughlin Motor Car Company found it hard to compete with General Motors and finally we ended up with a smaller number of car companies.

Industry committee  The marketplace isn't perfect, and I think the government's market presence test probably isn't perfect either. But it does present a reasonable effort, I think, to come up with a bright-line test, rather than a more complex economic assessment of the situation. As I understand it, what the government's test says is that the communities you'd worry about wouldn't be subject to forbearance until there are three independent players in the market.

Industry committee  Mr. Brison, our report is quite clear. We did not feel that the Competition Bureau could provide a full answer to the needs of applying competition policy in the telecom sector. We believe there should be something new, such as the TCT, to do that.

Industry committee  We feel that the market is actually working for the average consumer. If you've watched it closely, as I'm sure you have, based on what you've said, today's telecom consumer is immeasurably better off, in terms of the quality and types and pricing of service they get. You can call now, as people do, at the drop of a hat across Canada and across the ocean and all that.

Industry committee  Win-backs are probably the good example of one of the fundamental kinds of recommendations we made, which was that the regulatory framework should not proscribe per se activities. That is, it should not make something illegal just because there is a risk that it could harm competition.

Industry committee  Well, Ms. Davies, I don't think the two recommendations we made are at all inconsistent. We recommended that in the introduction of new services, the pricing of those services, and the marketing of those services, the regulator should withdraw from involvement in the day-to-day activities.

Industry committee  I think the answer is yes. In actual fact, this kind of rule that a telephone company cannot abandon service is already in place for Bell Canada under its special legislation and it's enforced indirectly by the CRTC. We just thought it was important to enshrine it in legislation.

Industry committee  We decided early on in our process not to hold public hearings as such, but rather to do two things: issue a consultation paper and then ask for input from the general public. We ensured that there was wide publication of that paper and received about 200 submissions from industry, consumer groups, academics, and others—many of the stakeholders in the industry.

Industry committee  It's outdated, yes. The legal framework is. To be fair, as we've said, the CRTC has struggled heroically with those two very broad rules—that rights be just and reasonable, and that there be no unjust discrimination—and has tried to craft a modern regulatory structure. Indeed, it was doing quite well, but in recent years we've found that other countries have moved ahead, in terms of applying a less monopolist public utility regime and more of a law-based, competitive approach.

Industry committee  Section 8 of the Telecommunications Act—and I recall the debate when it was being drafted back in the early 1990s—clearly gives the government the power to issue policy directions of general application. It was surprising to me that this was the first time in 13 years when this was actually done, but it's clearly within the government's power to issue a policy direction.

Industry committee  I don't think our panel felt that despite our best efforts, it would be likely or possible for all 127 of our recommendations to be enacted precisely as specified. We had a sense that we had a comprehensive package requiring a general overhaul of the legislation. But if the government and Parliament were to get it mostly right and move mostly in that direction, this would suffice.

Industry committee  I think you have listed the major institutional reforms. We went back to first principles. And I believe that the proper way for government to organize itself in the telecom sector—and, I might add, the way it's done in most OECD countries—is that the government itself should have strong policy research and policy-making capabilities; it should go to Parliament in order to propose and have Parliament ultimately enact legislation to set the general framework for it, and then it should have a number of independent professional regulators to administer those policies set by Parliament and by the government.

Industry committee  Yes, I think so. In our report, as you will recall, Monsieur Crête, we recommended that the government move in two stages. We suggested that there was an urgency and a need to move, to start to rely more on market forces very quickly. We would not criticize what the government has done to date.

Industry committee  Mr. Brison, there are a couple of aspects to your question. The first one deals with competition in smaller markets. I take your point entirely. The competition will not roll out as fast in smaller markets as it does in the major ones. That is the nature of—

Industry committee  I'm not convinced that's the case. It probably takes a number of policy and regulatory initiatives or a supportive framework to ensure competition there. In your riding, where my daughter is fortunate enough to be a constituent, being at Acadia University right now, EastLink is quite a formidable competitor in some parts of that market.