The Panel would like to acknowledge the many contributions made throughout its review process by the people and organizations who took an interest in our work.
First and foremost, we would like to thank those who made written submissions to the Panel. We received approximately 200 written submissions, totalling thousands of pages, many supported by useful studies and external data. Valuable submissions came from companies, industry and other associations, consumer groups and other non-government organizations, universities, academic experts and interested individuals. Others came from departments and agencies of the federal government, provinces, territories and municipalities. Many of the submissions were of very high quality — and all demonstrated that significant time, expertise, energy and resources were devoted to helping the Panel conduct its review. The ideas and analysis presented in the submissions provided solid input that was used in preparing our report and recommendations.
In addition to the written submissions, the Panel received very valuable input at two public policy fora. These events gave us an opportunity to listen to the views of experts from Canada and other countries on the issues set out in our terms of reference. The first forum on broadband access, which took place in Whitehorse, Yukon, on September 9, 2005, provided valuable assistance in understanding the issues faced in delivering broadband access across Canada — particularly "North of 60." The second forum on telecommunications policy, held in Gatineau, Quebec, from October 24 to 26, 2005, assembled some of Canada and the world's leading telecommunications and ICT experts. The high-quality presentations and lively debates at this event provided an excellent opportunity to explore and assess perspectives and international trends on the issues faced by the Panel.
As part of the review process, members of the Panel also met with policy makers, regulators and other telecommunications experts and stakeholders in Washington, D.C., London, U.K., Brussels, Dublin, Geneva, Paris, Tokyo and Seoul to obtain first-hand experience on the issues and concerns in other countries related to their telecommunications policy and regulatory frameworks. In addition, we received valuable information from the International Telecommunication Union, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, as well as policy makers and telecommunications stakeholders from a number of other countries. The assistance from Australia and New Zealand was particularly helpful. We are grateful to the government, regulatory, non-government and industry representatives who took time to meet with us and share their views on current telecommunications policy issues. In preparing our report and making our recommendations, we have drawn heavily on the experience of other countries, and wish to thank all of these friends of Canada for their generous contribution of time and insights.
The Panel also appreciated receiving information and advice from a wide range of Canadians during the course of its review, at a wide range of informal meetings and discussions during the ten months of our review. We learned from the valuable insights provided by consumers, First Nations organizations and other non-government organizations, government and regulatory officials, industry representatives and their professional advisors, and many other stakeholders in the future of telecommunications — and of Canada. We were repeatedly impressed with the importance that Canadians accord to the future of telecommunications policy and the role of information and communications technology in improving their lives.
The Panel was supported by a dedicated secretariat of government officials and consultants that included experts in telecommunications policy and regulation. The Panel would like to acknowledge the contributions made by all of the members of the secretariat and thank them for their dedication, patience, perseverance and unflagging support throughout the review process. Their work was essential in developing the Panel's report and its Consultation Paper, and in reviewing and assessing the numerous submissions we received, in organizing the Panel's policy forums, and arranging the meetings and briefings that took place throughout the review. We particularly appreciated their support throughout the lengthy working sessions and other discussions, extended conference calls, late-night meetings and multiple revisions to chapters and recommendations that were needed to produce our report.
This report would not have been possible without the hard work, insights and goodwill of a very large number of individuals. We apologize to those who have not been mentioned individually; we have avoided such mentions so as not to diminish the role of many other valuable contributors.
Gerri Sinclair
Hank Intven
André Tremblay
Ottawa
