I would like to go back to the table on research and development. Dr. Sanders, you said that this was not a rigorous study and that we had to consider variables in other provinces or countries, variables such as the national price. New Zealand has another approach when negotiating the price of drugs. In addition, some of these costs are reimbursed by insurance policies.
We may criticize the statistics that have been presented, but the fact remains that they are somewhat troubling. For example, in British Columbia, only 15% of the drugs are recommended for reimbursement whereas in Quebec the percentage is 62%.
With respect to new products, you said that this was about effectiveness and cost. Does that mean that Quebec allegedly reimburses expensive medication which does not necessarily provide greater effectiveness? If that's the case, you're better off using a product already available on the market. I believe one of you said that the new medications offered to patients were hardly more effective. I would like to know what you do not like about the research and development statistics. You have certainly read them, given that you criticize them in your statement, Ms. Sanders.
As for the list of approved drugs, I would like to know, in particular, whether those who have the highest acceptance rate—and that would be Quebec—pay much too much, given the effectiveness of these products. Is that what you meant?