Wednesday, February 11, 2009
A warning to politicians?
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:
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
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
Posted by Mark Goldberg @ 2/11/2009 02:17:00 PM 
Comments:
<< Home
The CRTC may well come to their decision in a reasoned legal framework using a transparent process, and still ultimately come to the wrong decision for Canadians. If so, NN advocates will need to encourage Parliament to change the framework upon which the CRTC based its decision.
Posted by 
: 10:02 PM, February 11, 2009
: 10:02 PM, February 11, 2009
Mark,
This is just silly. First, as Abattoir notes, if the CRTC rules that some of the practices that many people object to are permitted under the current law, then I would thought it obvious that those people will ask their elected officials to change the law. I look forward to the CRTC process, but if the Commission adopts an approach that raises significant concerns for Canadian consumers and businesses, I think many will want the government to become actively involved in the file.
Second, you warn against politicizing the process? Funny, you didn't seem too troubled by the cabinet lobbying from Bell and Telus to overturn the local forebearance decision. Same for the VOIP decision where there were no objections to the lobbying to overturn that decision.
If the CRTC happens rule against Bell et al on net neutrality, I look forward to your posting demanding that they accept the decision without further lobbying efforts.
Michael Geist
This is just silly. First, as Abattoir notes, if the CRTC rules that some of the practices that many people object to are permitted under the current law, then I would thought it obvious that those people will ask their elected officials to change the law. I look forward to the CRTC process, but if the Commission adopts an approach that raises significant concerns for Canadian consumers and businesses, I think many will want the government to become actively involved in the file.
Second, you warn against politicizing the process? Funny, you didn't seem too troubled by the cabinet lobbying from Bell and Telus to overturn the local forebearance decision. Same for the VOIP decision where there were no objections to the lobbying to overturn that decision.
If the CRTC happens rule against Bell et al on net neutrality, I look forward to your posting demanding that they accept the decision without further lobbying efforts.
Michael Geist
Posted by : 10:37 AM, February 12, 2009
: 10:37 AM, February 12, 2009
Gee, I don't see me warning anyone in my post so I am not sure where you come up with that second point. A warning is a message informing someone of danger. Warning politicians sounds threatening to me. That is why I didn't warn anyone.
In a democracy, I don't think we want our political leaders to create legislation based on warnings and intimidation.
Post a Comment
In a democracy, I don't think we want our political leaders to create legislation based on warnings and intimidation.
Posted by 
Mark Goldberg : 11:04 AM, February 12, 2009
Mark Goldberg : 11:04 AM, February 12, 2009 << Home
Syndicate
