Thank you.
There are two sides of the coin. One is that police currently incur significant costs, we would argue, around the illicit use of prescription drugs. They might simply not be aware of it.
The police leaders and the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police were the lead external partners on the development of recommendations around this, along with Public Safety. They have identified that the police community needs to have a better understanding of what the flow-through impact is on policing.
Public Safety has to date, as they have in the past, invested in the development of that analysis. It has begun. It is under way, which is a significant step forward in articulating where that might go. This would tie in—and I know it's not part of the remit of this committee—to the whole issue of the economics of policing and how the government wants to see where you are going vis-à-vis policing resources.
A cost impact analysis of understanding what is the flow-through, how that fits into efficient policing, and where that goes and where you want to spend your dollars best, is really what's going to come out of it. Public Safety is at the table, and that's part again.... As a committee or as a nation, how do we know all of the different parts that are occurring? That's where First Do No Harm can bring people back to the same table and make sure that the connectivity stays within the group.