I think you heard earlier that the fairly newly convened vaccine delivery partnership is doing country-by-country assessment of the national priorities and the need for very flexible and tailored plans of support for every single country. Of those 18 that remain under 10% coverage, 15 are emergency countries experiencing either conflict or other humanitarian emergencies.
We know, from our experience as humanitarian agencies responding around the world for the last 75 years, that what we require are very flexible forms of funding so that we can respond in emergencies. We need flexible and tailored planning and we need to work closely with those governments to adapt to their own local needs.
Some of the best examples we've seen of successful and quite rapid increase in coverage rates have been countries where they've been able to bundle and integrate the COVID response into other humanitarian response actions and health system actions, rather than having to treat it as yet another vertical response that stands alone.
This is not necessarily in the context of humanitarian emergency, but I know that Ethiopia has managed to increase by five times its coverage rate since mid-February by being able to be much more flexible in its planning. Other countries in emergency situations need to be able to do the same.
I would encourage Canada and all donor governments to make sure that funding is delivered in a flexible way to allow the humanitarian agencies to work closely on tailoring the kind of deployment needed so that it works for the local context.