Other than the post office, is there another government institution that consistently attracts such public attention as the CRTC? In fact, only the Toronto Maple Leafs are subjected to more arm-chair coaching, although the Leafs are far more likely to benefit from wisdom-juice inspired commentary.
As many readers know, I have not always agreed with the CRTC’s outcomes, but it is unfair to characterize the decisions with the type of mean-spirited attacks that have become popular by some of the harshest critics. In particular, it doesn’t help the debate to be name-calling in refering to decisions as coming from “illiterates” and I think it is naive to believe that “it is impractical to regulate Internet-based services.”
Internet-based services can be regulated and should be regulated, where the public interested is best served by doing so.
It is far too easy to dismiss the fact that considerable thought and analysis goes into CRTC decisions. The Commission has operated without the kind of policy direction from the Government that is called for in the new post-TPR environment; in the meantime, the CRTC has adopted a policy of supporting choice as means to achieve the greatest consumer benefits.
The cabinet direction to the CRTC for a review of the VoIP decision is a signal that we are going to see changes – and likely a signal that many of the TPR recommendations for structural changes are coming soon. We’ll be listening to the Minister provide the direction at The Canadian Telecom Summit next month. Until then, go ahead and be critical. Complain, moan and whine.
But remember, there are at least 3 sides to every issue in front of the CRTC. It is pretty rare that the right answer is as obvious as some of the partison commentators would have you believe.