I believe there is legislation in place, as I guess is evident from the policy or discussion paper before you, from disparate groups like Norway, Holland, Switzerland, etc. That legislation, not all of which is as well developed as Canada's, has not yet been acted on. Nor have the African countries as yet sought a compulsory licence, largely because I think no African country wants to be the first to go forward if their names are not protected. There is a tendency to retaliation, both threats from, often, the United States and explicit threats from pharmaceutical companies.
Look at what's happening right now in Thailand. The Thailand government issued a compulsory licence for the production of a generic equivalent of a drug called Kaletra, which is produced by Abbott Laboratories. Abbott engaged in quite an astonishing act of retaliation by saying that it would withdraw all its current drugs or any further drug development from the Thai market. Abbott has received a great deal of criticism because of that, but you can imagine the sense of vulnerability amongst African countries unless there is a regime in place that secures initially their confidence and then the flow of drugs.