Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and thank you very much to our presenters. We certainly have heard interesting presentations this morning.
I'd like to start with Mr. Orr, if I could, please. I think you said, if I understood you correctly, that we need to have a legislative requirement to do post-market surveillance, that what's in place today is not adequate, and that the legislative requirement should be there to do it properly and to get the best results that we need.
So I've got two or three things I want to ask you. That is one. Then you also talked about a definition of an adverse reaction that I believe is different from the definition we have today, although I'm not so sure there's a very specific definition today that is used by everyone. So maybe you could go over the four or five points that need to be in that definition.
Also, you talked about the medical devices, and you specifically mentioned the TMJ issues. In your opinion, what specific changes to the medical devices regulatory framework would strengthen post-market surveillance in Canada? Could you comment on those three things, please?