Michael Geist asks readers of his blog to flood the CRTC with input on its network management proceeding in advance of the submission deadline [which, by the way has just been extended to February 23].
I think that public engagement is a good thing, although a comment in the posting makes me wonder about “warning” our politicians:
Indeed, a strong response will send a signal to the CRTC about the public concern with net neutrality and serve as a warning to Canada’s politicians that they will have to step up to address the issue if the CRTC is unwilling to do so.
What is meant by “if the CRTC is unwilling to do so?”
The CRTC has already stepped up to address the issue. That is precisely why there has been a public notice issued, interrogatories directed to ISPs, a consultant report commissioned, public comment solicited, hearings scheduled, and then staff and Commissioner consideration of all the facts prior to releasing a Decision. Don’t we want a transparent process to assess such an important issue as opposed to a politicized lobbying effort with intimidation of politicians?
The CRTC has been more than willing to address the issue within a reasoned, legal framework. What can be behind this “warning to Canada’s politicians?”
Technorati Tags:
Michael Geist, CRTC