The opinions expressed in this editorial are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Decima Reports. In this issue of Report on Wireless, we report that the CRTC has again refused to allow Aliant Telecom to roll out a market trial of Voice Mobility International’s unified communications system (see article in this issue). Aliant wants to be able to offer its business subscribers a new and innovative system giving them the ability to manage in-coming email, voice mail and faxes from a single phone number. A system of this type would surely allow the company to better compete against its competitors. While the commission has the right to deny any proposed market trial because it is, for example, too broad in scope, the decision also highlights some seemingly inconsistent rule making. A case in point is the CRTC’s decision to not wade into the battle between the country’s four national wireless operators and the Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA). In its ruling, the commission refused to intervene and force the GTAA to not power down the carriers’ equipment because the wireless carriers didn’t meet the burden of proof. It seems as though the CRTC can’t ensure that a critical service like wireless telephony remains operational at Pearson International Airport, the country’s busiest airport. Yet at the same time, the telco regulator appears to feel that Aliant Telecom would potentially gain an unfair market advantage over its competitors if it were to allow for such a "broad" trial. It appears as though a four-city market trial is too broad for the commission’s liking. Some may say this is comparing apples to oranges. But others could equally say this is a case where the commission may be micromanaging the telecommunications industry on one hand and choosing to allow a competitive market to operate on the other. The latter is obviously the desired approach. Currently the CRTC is deliberating over a Part VII application filed by Microcell Telecommunications against Rogers Wireless Communications and Bell Mobility (see article in this issue). Microcell is hoping for a speedy decision in its favour, but judging by the commission’s track record, it is probably too hard to say which way it will go.