Health committee  Well, as usual there's a trade-off, isn't there? The trade-off here is that some Canadians don't have access to anything.

Health committee  A two-and-a-half-year wait time for a new drug versus no access to some people is.... Is that a reasonable...?

Health committee  I don't know where those figures come from. I'd dispute them to some extent, but—

Health committee  It's Medicines New Zealand.

Health committee  No, it's not. Is it Medicines New Zealand you're talking about?

Health committee  They are the representatives of the patented pharmaceuticals companies.

Health committee  As I said before, I'd like to know what their source is, because the comparisons don't stand up, in my mind.

Health committee  What is more concerning to me is the vast number of people in this country—the figure I hear is somewhere between 10% and 20% of people—who don't fill a scrip because they can't afford to. They don't have access.

Health committee  That I don't know. I don't know those numbers.

Health committee  No, I do not.

Health committee  Sure.

Health committee  To be frank, I think anything would be sufficient as a starting point to gain universal access, if the provinces were all in alignment and in agreement to see it funded. Over time you would manage it, adjust it, and add more to it. You might leave opportunity for those very high-

Health committee  Correct.

Health committee  New Zealand has had universal access to pharmaceuticals since about 1956, I believe. In 1993, it went from being a program run by the Ministry of Health to a separate arm's-length program run by a government agency. There were a few other changes that I remember. This fellow who

Health committee  No.