I wouldn't be so worried about this notion of progressive licensing if I felt confident that all caution was taken at the pre-market level, yet we keep hearing all kinds of horror stories in terms of the drug approval process.
We know that the licensing framework allows for the industry to basically pay for its drug approvals. We know that there are many drugs like Vioxx out there, and it doesn't seem that the post-marketing surveillance, a big centrepiece of progressive licensing, is going to do much on that front.
The government says nothing's changed, and yet we have a deputy minister or an ADM who comes to the committee and says, “We're implementing a shift in the focus from pre-market to this life cycle approach”. And we've got, of course, groups out there—and I think about the Best Medicines Coalition, with which I'm under some criticism for suggesting that it's supported by big drug companies—saying this bill and the progressive licensing system is great because it will get drugs that they want faster to market.
So is it not a worry? And what do we do in terms of our work as a committee to counter that possibility? This question is to all of you.