Did you bother reading the section that preceded my quote about the corruption that exists, even at the provincial level?

Here it is:

The pharmaceutical lobby is also extensive and influential in Canada.  Even the most cursory look at federal lobbying communications reports show weekly a myriad of drug companies (either home grown of subsidiaries of international companies) and their lobbyist are busy influencing policy. They use the same backdoor efforts as their American counterparts to further entrench their interests at the cost of the public.  Since the Liberal government was sworn in late last year, the meetings with the institutional corruption in the Canadian pharmaceutical sector, hidden in well funded PR and GR campaigns, is deep rooted. While Canada’s lobby reports are more general then those in the US, international trade was the top lobbying topic for Canada in 2015. Reading between the lines and scanning the reports the pharmaceutical sector and their industry association comes up time after time on this topic. International trade was mentioned 1,476 times in Canadian lobby communications reports in 2015 which is 248 more times than the number two topic. The top three topics: 1) international trade, 2) industry, and 3) health, call all encompass the pharmaceutical sector depending on how they choose to report their communication.

Here's another article from the CMA (Canadian Medical Association) - NOTE: a different writer:

https://www.cmaj.ca/content/189/8/e327

Experts blame feds for pharma corruption

Wolfe said that public involvement will be critical to securing the political will to enact any solution against industry corruption. “Start informing the public,” he urged participants in the meeting. “Health Canada is on pharma’s side and that’s unacceptable.”

Now, if we go back to our "consultant". How many months, how many interactions with an MP backbencher? Do you consider this money well spent, or is this all a freebie? I applaud RVX for waking up to the realities of life, but I wish he would have found some players with more clout!

Now, is it possible that there are shareholders who have connections on both sides of the political sphere that would make your head spin and even more so because they wouldn't charge the company a dime for introductions, but they refuse to use these connections based on our track record?

Let that sink in for a few moments.