Thank you.
I'm going to go back to Dr. Bennett's question about the high-level recommendations you'd give if this were your study and you wanted to point the direction, and I'll also be touching on the comments around under-utilization of resources and pan-Canadian visions.
My context is obviously British Columbia. There we're using midwives because there aren't enough obstetricians, but there is actually research that supports the outcomes midwives get. We're also moving to primary care teams that would include naturopathic physicians, and so on. In B.C., a Chinese doctor is part of a regulated profession, with a college, and in how many other provinces is that the case? Probably fewer than half are in that situation. When we want a pan-Canadian vision and if we want to tap into all our health care professionals, including complementary professions, we've got a big problem.
Do you think it would be beneficial to have a pan-Canadian direction around regulatory and scope-of-practice equivalency across the country, so that Nova Scotia would know what a naturopathic physician is and midwives could do their work and have hospital privileges right across the country? Do you think that's possible? Do you think it would be beneficial? How key is that equivalency in the scope-of-practice and regulatory approach for a pan-Canadian vision, or can we work around that problem?