The third question I have is in regard to your document comparing pharmacare options. It's the same kind of question my colleague Ms. Harder asked.
In terms of the $6.6 billion, you don't state it, but that's the cost comparison for the government. It's not the cost of the overall system. Other studies have shown that in fact the whole system would be cheaper if we were to move to a national pharmacare system.
When we converted from an employer-based health care sponsored system in the late 1960s and early 1970s, there was a sharing of costs between private sector firms that had been paying insurance and the government. Do you see that as a possible solution to cover this gap? Could we probably lower the cost that private companies are currently paying for drug plans and at the same time, carrying some of that support from them, manage to cover a public system in Canada?