4 ms·
The bureaucrats (CRTC) were the ones who tried to force this on the population. Elected officials decided to reverse the decision. The Conservatives first said
by 9oliYQjP 16y ago
The bureaucrats (CRTC) were the ones who tried to force this on the population. Elected officials decided to reverse the decision. The Conservatives first said they would send the decision back for "reconsideration" and then Harper chimed in with a more definitive reversal stance. The Liberals came out earlier saying they were against UBB. The New Democrats have always been fairly progressive about the web and are also against UBB. Even the separatist Bloc Quebecois and Green Party were both voicing concern with the decision. There was no major political party in favour of the decision.
We get into these kinds of messes because the CRTC is a bunch of unelected bureaucrats playing musical chairs in and out of executive positions at Rogers, Bell, Telus, etc.. It is most perplexing because if you've dealt with other bureaucrats in Canada, most of them at least care about their jobs and try to look out for the public good. We can joke at their expense about how they have all these perks and what not. But most do uphold the laws and regulations they're sworn to. And since they tend to outlast elected governments, these are the people that actually keep programs that we depend on, like health care, running. But the CRTC? It's the lone hold out of the bunch. I pretty much have nothing good to say about that organization. I would not be sad in the least if they were dissolved.
- cal5k 16y agoI think it's safe to say that, with two major reversals in a year, the CRTC has lost any credibility it may have had (although it did not have much to lose). My vote would be for dissolution - maybe then they can create a regulator that actually employs people who understand what they're regulating.
- gamble 16y agoThey know what they're doing. The problem is that they're biased. It's fundamentally the same issue that plagues financial regulation. The people who are the most qualified to understand the technological and regulatory issues are the most biased, because almost by necessity they're products of the same industry they're supposed to regulate.
- rfugger 16y agohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture
- noibl 16y agoOn reading more about this I was depressed to see very little in the way of proposals to avoid the phenomenon, except (surprise! it's Stigler) don't regulate. But I did find some interesting ideas at the end of this paper: http://www.icgg.org/downloads/Boehm%20-%20Regulatory%20Capture%20Revisited.pdf http://www.icgg.org/downloads/Boehm%20-%20Regulatory%20Captu... (pp. 23-24)
- spitfire 16y agoWhat was the other major reversal? I'm a bit out of the loop.
- jarek 16y agoThe decision to block Wind Mobile from operating as it didn't meet Canadian ownership requirements.
- lurchpop 16y agoSee "regulatory capture" wiki link below. What'll happen is what always does in the US. They'll assume the only people who know what they're doing are the regulatED, and there's your revolving door. Pretty sweet choices: idiocy or corruption.
- redthrowaway 16y agoI don't think they need to be disolved, as in theory they perform a necessary function. Instead, merely sack all of the directors and hold parliamentary hearings for their replacements. Make it open and accountable, and you won't see the kind of patronage happening.