Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thanks to our guests for coming today.
There are a few things I've heard today that have struck me. One of them is this aggregate total of rare disease, which actually strikes me as a very high incidence.
I think you said it was one in ten, Mr. Lee, or one in twelve, as per your paper; it's roughly the same.
The other thing is the easy and free acknowledgement that international cooperation and collaboration make so much sense, and in fact kind of follow naturally because of the small groupings and stuff.
I think, Mr. Lee, you said that in fact the thing about rare disease is that it attracts a lot of international cooperation.
In spite of all of that, to date we somehow seem to have resisted that natural attraction to international cooperation by just now—if I understand this correctly—bringing in this framework, or proposing a framework that will, in your terms, Mr. Lee, create space in which Canadian research and innovation can thrive.
I'm kind of stunned by the place we're at with all of this, frankly. In order to almost fight the natural attraction for international cooperation to be able to participate in that and help the 10% of Canadians who suffer from rare diseases, we somehow have resisted that opportunity, and are in the place we're in today.
Ms. Wong-Rieger, I want to ask you about the genome research you mentioned at the end of your last comments. Now that we seem to be on the precipice of a place in which Canadian research and innovation can thrive with this framework—if that's indeed the case—how do we connect this genome research into the issue of rare diseases? Is there an element of the national strategy you're proposing that does specifically that?