That's a great question. This is something we are following very closely. I agree with you that it looks on first glance.... On that law there was a lot of interest in repealing it and I continue to hear from people who are interested in repealing the law.
The reality is that in order to provide an exemption for some of these supervised consumption sites, there are a number of steps that, whether that law had been put in place or not, Health Canada would have required a site to go through. They include things like making sure you've consulted with the chief of police, making sure you've consulted with other stakeholders, making sure you have safety mechanisms for surveillance in the building, for instance, for how the products get in and out of the building, for how the needles are disposed of, all kinds of regulations that have to be put in place.
The reality is that the extra additional steps the law adds are not considerably greater than the steps that would have been undertaken anyway.
Having said that, we're delighted that now not only the Dr. Peter AIDS Centre but also Insite have been able to get their exemptions under the existing law. There are other communities that are currently working on getting an exemption under the existing law.
We will watch this very closely. We believe that it's not an unreasonable bar. We had indicated very clearly that Health Canada will support communities that want to work their way through this process. I will keep an open mind, but at this point we don't believe that it should be a top priority for us to amend that legislation because we believe that it looks like the municipalities are going to be able to work within it.