That's our operating presumption. I know a lot of people feel strongly that there is a link between price and access. I would point out that notwithstanding the fact that Canada currently pays the third-or fourth-highest prices in the world, we are roughly 13th or 14th in terms of access. Even the industry's own studies show at best a very weak correlation between price and access. If you remove the U.S. from the equation and from many of those models that folks in industry put forward, there's hardly any correlation at all. You'd have to have a huge increase in price to get even a tiny improvement in access.
However, yes, ultimately the objective here is that if prices come down, and particularly the prices of these incredibly high-cost drugs—and not by a significant margin, mind you, and again the ultimate impact of this is $6.2 billion in the context of about $200 billion spent over the next 10 years—then presumably, if basic economic theory holds in this case, access would go up and utilization would go up. If prices go down, utilization goes up. Obviously you don't want prices to go down to a point where companies can't make a profit in Canada—