Mr. Chair, just to clarify that—maybe not for the benefit of the member, because I know that there's obviously a good familiarity, but maybe for the benefit of the committee—we administer a number of regimes. Sometimes in the press and sometimes publicly the activities under each regime get a bit confused, so I just want to explain very briefly.
When it comes to the production of cannabis for medical purposes by a licensed producer or for the legal market by a licensed producer, there are a whole series of very stringent regulations that have to be followed to maintain their licence so that they have the right to sell to patients or to sell into the recreational market.
It is absolutely the case that there have been instances of community concerns around odour and those sorts of things, and I want to assure the member and the committee that we are quite aggressive in following up on that. There are very clear regulations around odour control and filtration systems, etc. There have been cases in the past in which the judgment has been that maybe companies had to do more to ensure compliance, and we're quite aggressive, actually, at following up.
We have extensive authority to actually go onto the facility, inspect property and review records—all those sorts of things—and I think there's a reasonable case to be made that we do that very aggressively. In fact, our level of inspection of those facilities is considerably higher than in a number of of our other regulatory regimes.
Then there is the case of individuals who have a medical condition and have permission from their doctor. They've gone to see their physician—