Thanks for that.
I have another question. I want to go back to the CMA. There's been a bit of discussion now about the age threshold and how to set that. Clearly, there are competing interests here. I think everybody is aware of the medical research that says, really, until the age of 25, you should not be using cannabis, but then there are other competing pressures. We know that 30% of people under the age of 30 are using cannabis, and we have one of the highest rates of cannabis use in the developed world. Also, there are black market concerns.
I've been a bit concerned about the tone from the CMA here today, which is sort of that the government is dismissive of or not paying attention to the medicine and science behind this. In the fall of last year, the CMA said in its position statement that 25 is the “ideal minimum age” for legal purchases, but that 25 was unrealistic. Just as you've said, it's not going to be realistic to hold or prevent youth from accessing marijuana at the age of 25, but then you've put another lens to it and said that maybe it's 21. The government has put the same lenses to it and has said that maybe it's 18. I think it's best that we work together on this rather than that tone of “you're not paying attention to the medical science”. That's just my observation.
At the end of the day, I come back to this. If it's illegal, short of using criminal charges, how are we going to stop kids from doing it? One thing is to close down the black market as best we can, and there's been a lot of discussion about how effective the legislation will be on that, but the other is obviously education, education, education. Do you want to comment on what parameters you consider to go from 25 to 21? You've already talked about the education piece, so I won't ask for that again. I just wanted to soften your message a bit here on that.