Canadian Heritage committee  Well, first of all, we've campaigned very actively against fee-for-carriage, or as it became known, value-for-signal. We didn't think it was a good idea then, and we still don't think it's a good idea. We think it's a very bad idea. We don't see how consumers would accept payin

Canadian Heritage committee  We were opposed then, and we're still opposed.

Canadian Heritage committee  I hope I'm not speaking out of turn. My latest example would be that they have a strange term they've created called the “new media broadcast undertakings”. What they are going to do is ask us to file a whole bunch of information and look at possible regulations affecting us. W

Canadian Heritage committee  With respect to vertical integration, some intervenors have incorrectly described this as a threat to the system. The opposite is true. To compete in the digital universe, we need an industry structure that allows us to remain at the leading edge of innovation. Our ownership of

Industry committee  What we've learned in this business is you can't predict what customers are going to do and respond to. The one thing we do know is that two of the most important things over the next decade are going to be television and broadband. And the ability to develop, in creative ways, c

Industry committee  I'd just like to say, from a Shaw point of view, J.R. Shaw didn't spend 40 years of his life building this company to turn around and sell it. Quite the contrary: we're always looking for acquisitions in terms of trying to expand the company and become more competitive. Our inter

Industry committee  Can I just respond? I have a cabin in Mr. Clement's riding, and I'm amazed at the level of television service I get through Shaw Direct and my Bell high-speed wireless service, which is phenomenal. Over the last ten years we have seen significant improvements in our access to c

Industry committee  Our view would be that in terms of new services, from a customer point of view the most important is our ability to offer multiple platforms. It's difficult for new entrants to come in and be able to do that. From a customer point of view there would probably be that kind of cons

Industry committee  Can I just go back to the profit situation? My answer does relate to the point you're making right at the moment. We pointed out to the CRTC over the past few years that basic cable does not make money. The investments we make where we generate a return on our investment are in n

Industry committee  We have no constraints in terms of capital at this time. Our main concern with changes to the rules would be that we would be disadvantaged going forward; that the small pool of money Jean was talking about would no longer be available to us at Shaw but would be available to some

Industry committee  I think Mr. Shaw a number of years ago indicated exactly that point. It's not necessarily a cost, as such, but it's a check mark; in other words, that when you're looking for investment, people see any regulatory restrictions as something they have to be concerned about and look

Industry committee  We're not even close.

Industry committee  If I could start on that, in terms of the Globalive situation, the government has made a determination under the rules that, since they have a difference from the CRTC, would mean the rules probably need some clarification in this sense. Our concern is, and in terms of the OECD,

Industry committee  We would agree with that position. Our view of how things need to be dealt with is that there needs to be a stronger role, quite frankly, in the policy environment, for Parliament and also for government, in terms of setting policy direction for the regulator. So our view would b

Industry committee  Good morning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. We at Shaw also appreciate the opportunity to participate in this proceeding. I am Ken Stein, senior vice-president of corporate and regulatory affairs at Shaw Communications. I am joined by Jean Brazeau, who