Did you even click the link? Which of the examples listed in the article was due to bad regulation? A "net neutrality" bill would've forced the CRTC to rule in favor of the small ISPs, the copyright modernization act is being pushed by the Conservative party, and opposed by every "big government" party, and the SMS scandal is a failure to challenge price gouging.
I love that, without any knowledge of Canadian telecom regulation, you're ready to announce that over-regulation is the problem. Way to go, brownie.
A "net neutrality" bill would've forced the CRTC to rule in favor of the small ISPs
Can you name a regulation that in practice has benefited small companies at the expense of larger companies? Most regulations get enacted in two steps 1) a moral argument is made for the need for some sort of government intervention. 2) while no one is paying attention to the sausage making in Congress, the bill is worded to actually favor specific interests, often at the expense of the public.
To believe that "net neutrality" would end up different is the triumph of hope over experience. Big companies have far more money to lobby, and they always win the regulatory game.
The problem is this: if the Canadian telecom market were open to competition, why doesn't a new competitor move in and clobber the existing phone companies in the market? I read the article and in two of the three complaints, the writer is angry because government doesn't fix the problems he sees in the marketplace. The government won't force Bell to give small ISPs unlimited bandwidth and the government is allowing SMS "price gouging". (The writer's other complaint is that the government wants to modernize copyright, I assume that means that government wants to extend the existing copyright laws to the internet.)
The writer implies that outside competition is not a viable solution and that consumer wellbeing is solely a function of government whim.
Assuming the writer knows what he's (not) talking about, i.e., that outside competition is not an option, then I can only assume that the reason it's not an option is because of the existing regulatory environment.
The writer's proposed solution seems to me to be calling for yet more regulation.
So it appears that in Canada government is keeping competition out and not doing enough to force existing companies to increase their quality of service and decrease their prices.
Excuse me for assuming that over-regulation is the problem. Now I see that Canada needs more regulation. Government there is not doing enough to tell businesses what they need to do, what kind of contracts they can make, and what prices they can charge. Of course this would also make Canada more open to competition. Businesses just love to do business in a place where government bureaucrats help them with lots of detailed rules that require teams of lawyers to figure out. Businesses, especially startups, also like it when government forces them to rewrite contracts and charge lower prices. Thanks for setting me straight.
>> I can only assume that the reason it's not an option is because of the existing regulatory environment.
The usual explanation in telecom is the natural monopoly argument, also prevalent in other utility services with high cost of market entry and network effects.
>f the Canadian telecom market were open to competition, why doesn't a new competitor move in and clobber the existing phone companies in the market?
Barriers to entry. Infrastructure costs. Gov't incentives to provide better services where the incentives reward after the fact are the solution. Not throwing money at the problem with no oversight.
The main is the barriers to entry. Although both the Liberals and Conservatives have said they plan to pass a bill enabling the entry of foreign companies. Virgin Mobile is in Canada
As soon as companies like T-Mobile can enter the country I have little doubt Telus will go bankrupt, or near to it, as it's solely cellphone. Telus does seem to try and innovate, but it's trapped on the CDMA network but is releasing a HSPA in 2010. Rogers already has the HDSPA and has for a while, Bell has the CDMA high-speed mobile, which barely any handset manufacturers actually provide new phones in CDMA.
I actually wish I could move near the Falls so that I could steal T-Mobile USA off my old T-Mobile UK phone. The ironic thing is that international text is cheaper than going with Telus or Bell.
I love that, without any knowledge of Canadian telecom regulation, you're ready to announce that over-regulation is the problem. Way to go, brownie.