I’ll admit it. I like reading CRTC decisions. I find them informative and often even entertaining.
I know that makes me a little, well ummm, different?
A lawyer colleague of mine tells me that every law student learns about judgments by Lord Denning. I am told he had a beautiful writing style and the reader could immediate tell where his judgments were heading from the opening sentence.
Take a look at the opening of the dissenting opinion by Commissioner Barbara Cram, in the CRTC’s decision last week to reject the appeal by Barrett Xplore.
Once again I disagree with my colleagues in the majority on this issue and I reiterate my dissent from Telecom Decision CRTC 2006-9 in its entirety. I continue to believe that my concerns stated therein remain valid and unanswered. And upon having the ability to once again reflect on the majority decision, I have further concerns.
Any doubts about where she is heading on this? Agree or not (and I agree), her dissent is well written.
Why are there unanswered questions and concerns? As Commissioner Cram argues, is the CRTC the right agency to act as project manager for rural broadband?