We sort of run the in middle of the pack when you look at national comparatives that are similar to us. We've heard the example of Spain, which for deceased donation is about double our rate. However, we're doing reasonably well, certainly when you look at improvements over time on deceased donation. We compare reasonably favourably with the United Kingdom. We compare reasonably favourably with Australia. It does depend what the comparisons are. International comparisons are useful because they force self-reflection, but they have their limitations. We can look at best practices elsewhere and we can learn from them. But really, in comparing ourselves to the United Kingdom, the geographical dynamic is completely different, and the challenge with access to institutions depending on where you live is obviously different by definition. So there are limitations to what one can gather.
The same applies for living donation. There again, we compare reasonably favourably with some of the comparators. There might be less to learn from international comparisons, but I think actually the real value of those comparisons at this point is to set for ourselves some targets, to say we know it can be done better and ask of ourselves why we can't achieve the improvements.
I think we've heard the recipes themselves, so to speak, very clearly articulated by both British Columbia and Ontario, the kinds of things that are needed at the local level to achieve those kinds of rates.