This is a question about procurement. It's not a question about health policy; it's a question about procurement. When procurement decisions have been made and tens of thousands of Canadians have died as a result of the opioid crisis while companies have benefited from those procurement decisions, obviously a message is sent to Canadians, to their families and to their communities who have suffered. In this case McKinsey, which was part of the process of offering advice to Purdue Pharma, was able to benefit from these contracts.
Do you consider the public interest? Do you consider the impact on those families? When you are giving such a large volume of contracts to a company that was instrumental to their suffering, is that part of your calculations, or is that not something you do or you're supposed to do or you're able to take into consideration?