Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would ask that maybe the research providing the testimony from Apotex, which was provided in the Senate with regard to Bill S-232--because they did answer on that--be distributed. That may be the next best thing we can get, because it is official, on-the-record testimony under the same rules as that of the House Commons.
Ms. MacLean, you made me smile when you talked about the watch, because that was one of the things we were told. I've heard these condescending arguments about “oh your intent is good”, and “if you just understood things a little bit better....” It diverts people from the real issue, which is that Parliament decided there was a role for the private sector to play with regard to this human catastrophe we have across the globe. We, as the public sector, could continue to do, and should do, some other things, such as what Mr. Williams was suggesting, and as common global citizens we could use public sector money to build that infrastructure. But the legislation is set up with the intent, and to recognize, that the members of the private sector, especially given the fact that they get generous research and development and a series of other tax breaks, could actually expand the usage of those terrific breakthroughs. We thank them for the work they're doing, and as long as that information was protected and respected, we would develop a system to expand the use of patents across the globe.
Mr. Perry, we've had only one case so far with Apotex. Say, for example, Bill C-393 went through and we had five per year that were granted from there on. I'm speaking hypothetically. Would that drive away investment from your company, from Canada, because the usage of that went further?