I'm not sure what the values are behind the judgments that lead to the Quebec formulary, but I think there's another possible explanation, and that is how they interpret the evidence. They are presented, really, with the same evidence. Those same binders go to every drug formulary, but it means they may be interpreting it in a very different way. They may put different values on different aspects of that submission.
It does speak, again, to the fact that every committee is going to have some hidden values that they bring to the table. They may not be able to articulate them all. So I don't think we have to invoke a nefarious plot or that they have consciously decided that more drugs mean more health. People look at the evidence differently and they value different things.