Maybe.
There are a few things I would like to say about the national pharmaceutical strategy. First, I believe it's unnecessary. The distribution of catastrophic drug expenses in the population is quite small. If we look at the data presented by Ken, for instance, there is a small percentage of people with catastrophic drug expenses. If we ask ourselves what percentage of that group lacks the income and insurance coverage to pay for those drugs when they reach a catastrophic level, it's an even smaller percentage.
Secondly, the national pharmaceutical strategy seems to be based on a desire by the provinces to escape responsibility for the rationing decisions they're making and upload it to the federal government, or at least to a quasi-national government agency like the CDR--common drug review--for instance.
So I believe it's unnecessary and a way for governments to avoid accountability for decisions they take on rationing. For those reasons, I would not be in favour of pushing forward with a national pharmaceutical strategy.