Mr. Livingston, I want to ask you a question.
In previous times we dealt with products like Taxol. We dealt with Losec in the past, because it was an issue that did come up with respect to evergreening. These types of issues tend to be almost causes célèbres.
In the case of Taxol, members of your industry claimed a patent that was actually produced, created, and paid for by American taxpayers. It was later determined by the Supreme Court of Canada that in fact one of your member companies didn't have the right to it. The company that produced it in St. Catharines--the riding of a chairman who was previous to Mr. Rajotte--was allowed to in fact proceed with the product.
We also have the issue of Losec. Before, your members gave testimony to the fact that none of these products were produced in Canada. No research was done in Canada. Not even the packaging was done in Canada.
If you're asking for greater patent protection, and you're asking for more opportunity to extend to 20 years, why should Canada give you that extension when you're not prepared to make the investments in R and D to begin with?