Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Before I move on to my questions, I just want to say that I am a bit disturbed by the attitude of my colleagues opposite who seem to be attacking our witnesses. I think we should be very respectful of people who take the time to come testify before a committee. I am referring specifically to Ms. Adams, who is questioning our witnesses' studies and credentials, as well as Mr. Young, who is accusing one of our witnesses of having a financial interest in the sale of marijuana for medical purposes. After all, the Conservative government has decided that, as of this year, people have to buy their medical marijuana from third parties instead of growing it at home. So I feel that these comments are somewhat ambiguous.
Here are my questions for the witnesses.
It has been mentioned several times that marijuana has as many benefits as risks. Ideally, we would all like to live in a world where no one consumes any drugs, including marijuana. In 2007, one of the pillars of the government's drug policy was harm reduction. Today, one witness said that marijuana's level of dependence is very, very low compared with other types of addictive substances.
In the event of a government change or a new government measure to reinsert harm reduction into the drug policy, what kind of a role do you think marijuana could play in reducing harm?