My apologies.
In addition, then, to a regular review of CDR and its activities, we would also suggest that individual direct programs, expert advisory committees, should be the subject of regular review to make sure that, on an ongoing basis, individual drug programs are not duplicating or overlapping the CDR process but rather they are complementing each other.
CDR should be encouraged to expedite and expand its plans to increase transparency. The success of these measures should be evaluated after six to 12 months. Transparency is always a major public concern today, as we know, on all fronts. CDR should also evaluate the experience of the addition of two public members to CEDAC. CDR should examine the roles and experience of the citizens' councils in the United Kingdom and Ontario, where in fact they have provided an additional mechanism for public input to the expert advisory process.
CDR should incorporate processes for qualified or conditional recommendations by CEDAC. Such recommendations could take into account the challenges that some drugs present in meeting standards of evidence and the potential for benefiting a patient population with limited or no other treatment options.
CDR should consider the use of subcommittees in certain specialty fields in order to broaden the expertise applied in certain drug reviews.
Our last point is that all governments should work together to expedite the implementation of studies that present real-world evidence and answer key questions that may be raised in the evaluations by CDR. In other words, we shouldn't just look at the evaluation before the drug is implemented for funding purposes, but rather after the drug has been on the market for some time.
Thank you for our opportunity. May I make one more comment, please? We just want to say that as former drug plan managers, we have the highest respect for the staff and expert advisers of CDR, CEDAC, and other expert advisory committees in this field. We know first hand their commitment and the difficulties they face in trying to bring forward recommendations that promote the best possible care for Canadians in this highly complex and very controversial field.
Thank you very much.