Thank you for the question.
I think the message we're hoping to convey is that unlike the way money has been transferred in the past—and I'm thinking about the 2004 accord—there was money earmarked for wait-time reduction. I think in hindsight one could argue that the accountability attached to that was quite loose. The product that was delivered was okay, but we sort of managed to tread water but not really transform the system.
This time we're saying—setting aside the question on the amount of money, because I understand that's a very political issue—that if we accept there are going to be some federal transfers, let's attach some very smart accountability to those. What we're offering, I suppose, is the end result of a two- or three-year period in our organization's history in which we've really given this a great deal of thought. We thought, it's a big problem and it touches virtually every Canadian, but if you had to start somewhere, where would you start? Senior care is where everything seems to land, because if we can fix senior care, I think we'll fix a lot of what's wrong with the system. The targeted investments we're talking about now need to be tied to much more accountability for what that's going to deliver. Very importantly, it can't just be about the federal government. I think it has to be about what provincial and territorial governments bring. Frankly, it has to be what we bring to it, too. Physicians and other health care providers have to be part of the solution. We all have to step up our game.