Perfect, and I'm sure Steve will be able to add something as well.
Value-based pricing is very interesting. You pay for the health outcomes and not for the products. What we negotiate with the drug companies is how much they will contribute to improving the health of the population. We will pay for this incremental improvement. There are ways to do that. There are standards in health economy, life years. It's complicated. It's not an easy science for sure. Some things are debatable.
But the proof is in the pudding, and I think in the U.K. it will be interesting to see what goes on there. One thing about value-based pricing is that it doesn't work with a fragmented system. If you have a fragmented system to pay for your drugs, there's no way you can address the health outcomes for the population.
I think the really interesting innovations in the way we organize pricing and the way we organize financial incentives in the pharmaceutical sector come from countries where you don't have the fragmentation of drug coverage that we have in Canada. I think this is the best way to say exactly what we want, what we expect from the drug we buy, and what conditions we need to impose to make this happen. I strongly believe that when you're clear about what you want, other people might not like you, but they will respect you.