Yes, there are legal and clinical safeguards that must be considered.
Shouldn't recommendation 10 of the expert panel report be referred to in the act or the regulations that will be made under the act? I think it's important to do that. I know that what we'll eventually adopt will be completely different from what we now have because we haven't come up with the final bill. However, it seems to me that, if we want to have a discussion and do good work in the short term, we should mention recommendation 10.
The other recommendation that I consider important regarding mental disorders is recommendation 16, which concerns prospective oversight, not retrospective oversight. Quebec has established a committee to monitor medical assistance in dying acts and to report retrospectively on those acts.
Consequently, there should be a prospective provision regarding mental disorders and thus an additional step that would have to be taken before acting. If the request is admissible and the patient has gone through all the steps, a committee would review the process to determine whether it's satisfactory and complies with all the safeguards, both clinical and legal. I think it's important to do this properly in the case of mental disorders, given the fact that the experts are divided on the matter. We will have to proceed this way if we want to establish a system in a calm manner.
The question I would ask is as follows.
It's all well and good to postpone passage of this bill, but, from the moment it's passed, once it has been passed by the Senate, what intermediate steps will have to be taken? What will you have to do right away once this bill is passed? That's the problem that we've had since we started this study on medical assistance in dying. We delayed action, again and again, and wound up with deadlines that were too short and requests for extension.
What will you do immediately after royal assent so that we can continue our work?