Very briefly, I totally agree with what Ilse just said.
There are two other things that government can do. I mentioned the quote from CIHR and we know that CIHR is moving quickly to address the translation aspect of what they're doing, but encouraging them to do so is very important.
Another program is IRAP. IRAP in its criteria says that it doesn't fund certification of technologies. There's a misconception of what a clinical trial is and what clinical development of technologies is. In medical technologies, 75% of the early stage capital that they get is to do clinical trials to generate evidence in order to show that their technology works, etc.
That's misconstrued as a licensure, a certification that you meet a standard in telecoms or something like that. The problem is that we need to change those criteria, or broaden the definition of them so that it can get fully funded by IRAP. IRAP is a great program. It just stops short of 75% of the capital that early stage med-tech companies have to spend. That's something government can do, and it would be a dramatic difference if IRAP were to understand that nuance.