Industry committee  Yes. In fact, Rogers and Shaw aren't competitors. All the businesses in the cable industry—Eastlink, Vidéotron, Cogeco, Shaw and Rogers—have grown through acquisition. That's all part of a movement that's been going on for 30 years. It's also the case in the United States with Co

Industry committee  I think the rules the government issued in 2008 have proven they can produce results. Competition is now established in the maritime provinces and Quebec, in addition to British Columbia, Alberta and Ontario. So it's important that these rules be retained. Authorities must also e

Industry committee  Maybe I will ask my colleague Jean-François, because during that time I was not CEO, but what I will say is that, with all the respect I have for Manitoba—in fact, we used to have a few newspapers there, especially in Winnipeg—it's a smaller province. We've been in an environment

Industry committee  That's a very interesting question. Obviously we're not ISED. We're not the one who will make public policy, but you probably knew that at the beginning, early in the implementation of wireless services, the spectrum was given away to the first operators. Through the decades, tha

Industry committee  Thank you for your question. Are you referring to the possibility that Freedom Mobile might be one of the assets acquired by Rogers in the merger? Is that the gist of your question?

Industry committee  Auctions are subject to very clearly defined rules. I refer you to paragraph 261 of the policy and licensing framework for spectrum in the 3500 MHz band, which clearly states that, in the circumstances, Shaw unfortunately couldn't be a favoured or a set-aside-eligible bidder in t

Industry committee  First of all, as I mentioned to you, Mr. Masse, in 2008 we were interested in building a national network. Unfortunately, for different reasons.... One of the reasons was that the auction very, very expensive. In considering our financial capacity, we arrived at the conclusion th

Industry committee  —but at the beginning, the purpose was to build a network. Unfortunately, we were not able to do so.

Industry committee  Ms. Chair, may I answer?

Industry committee  It's been said before that the fourth operator, which is Freedom Mobile, will disappear because the cartel or oligopoly that Canadians used to face will basically be rebuilt.

Industry committee  I tried to address this in my comments. Clearly, to enter a market, the fourth player had to be even more combative. Our involvement in the first auction in 2008 was very expensive. It cost us around $500 million. We therefore had to amortize this amount over the largest possible

Industry committee  I don't believe that we' re asking the government or the state to invest in a fourth player. We believe the government can maintain competition by ensuring that the required conditions are in place for a fourth player to operate. That's how systematic everyday competition would b

Industry committee  As early as 2008, we had approached a number of operators to give us a national presence. It didn't work, for all kinds of reasons. First of all, at the time, we didn't have the financial capacity. Additionally, the presence of a group called Globalive had caused the auction pric

Industry committee  Madam Chair, is the question for Mr. Thomson or for both of us? Would you like to start, Jay? Do you have anything to say on this question?

Industry committee  I support and agree with what Jay's saying. I'd like to also say that from an ISED perspective, it would also be important to make sure that the spectrum is well distributed, because it is a public asset, so that all operators will be in a position to provide a service of great