 Harper fires CRTC Chair The head of Canada's telecommunications regulator is joining the list of agency bosses who've lost their jobs after butting heads with the Harper government.Commentsview comments in forum Page 1 2 You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news. |
Share
Who voted on this?
|
Mobile
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
A temp not being re-hired is the same as being fired?
A temp not being re-hired is the same as being fired?
The Liberals are convinced these are job-for-life appointments.
ANYTHING so they can whine and bitch.
A temp not being re-hired is the same as being fired?
The Liberals are convinced these are job-for-life appointments.
ANYTHING so they can whine and bitch.
And yet when the news came out that the NDP temp leader was once a separatists somehow the right came to the conclusion that all the NDP was going separatist. Bitching happens both ways in politics.
That's what you get for doing what's right, as opposed to what you are told.
You hit the nail on the head with that comment.
That's what you get for doing what's right, as opposed to what you are told.
You hit the nail on the head with that comment.
Nah, he's just a liberal whiner.
That's what you get for doing what's right, as opposed to what you are told.
I'm not sure usage based billing was anything close to a right decision by him or the CRTC.
That's what you get for doing what's right, as opposed to what you are told.
I'm not sure usage based billing was anything close to a right decision by him or the CRTC.
I think it was exactly correct. I don't get charged more for electricity or gas or water or cable TV when I go over my arbitrary quota, why should that apply to internet service?
That's what you get for doing what's right, as opposed to what you are told.
I'm not sure usage based billing was anything close to a right decision by him or the CRTC.
I think it was exactly correct. I don't get charged more for electricity or gas or water or cable TV when I go over my arbitrary quota, why should that apply to internet service?
But it does. I dunno who you're ISP is but I sure as fuck pay more for going over my arbitrary quota!
I think it was exactly correct. I don't get charged more for electricity or gas or water or cable TV when I go over my arbitrary quota, why should that apply to internet service?
...The CRTC was pushing for usage based billing, which the government basically told him "No". I'm completely against usage based billing, but the CRTC basically told the telecoms they could, until the government overuled them
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/com100/2011/i110203.htm
I think it was exactly correct. I don't get charged more for electricity or gas or water or cable TV when I go over my arbitrary quota, why should that apply to internet service?
...The CRTC was pushing for usage based billing, which the government basically told him "No". I'm completely against usage based billing, but the CRTC basically told the telecoms they could, until the government overuled them
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/com100/2011/i110203.htm
Ahhh yes! It was after the government stepped in that they got the hint, IIRC! Thanks!
Honestly it's one of those very few decisions where I actually agree with the government. Usage based billing was a huge attempt to cater to the big tel cos by the CRTC and not to the public's best interest. Now only if they would listen to the public on the idiocy inherent in their copyright and intellectual property laws related to digital locks.
With those, we are pooched. Breaking Digital locks to use the things you pay for will be a crime.
http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6026/125/