I am just going to say that the theory about public goods is very simple: Who benefits from a population free of contagious diseases? Well, we all benefit, so it's not a private good to have a world free of disease, but it's actually all of us who benefit. So it's not a private investor who will be able to capture a private value out of this. That's why public authorities are definitely better positioned because they represent the public interest.
That being said, I think we all know here that we wouldn't want to have our education or our health services depend on whether Inco, in our mining town, had a good year or a bad year, or whether we just figure or don't figure in their branding plan for that moment. It just doesn't work. So it is important that we have this really important backbone of health systems. And I think most organizations and most countries agree on this. The United States still believes a lot in the private sector backbone, but I don't think they have a track record that really inspires that much confidence in that area.
So, overall, we would say it's not subject to debate. The real question is this: Can the private sector help in some of the delivery there? Can it assist in some of the funding mechanisms, etc.? There are innovative financing mechanisms, for instance, where governments can issue bonds to pay later, and offer some prices through advance market commitments. The private sector can help in marketing those bonds in the future and participating in branding exercises. I think it's those types of partnerships that we need to look at--without a substitution effect but a synergistic effect of sorts.