Thank you very much, Mr. Hanley, and I thank you for your advocacy and work in public health prior to this job and during it.
In the first order, what we've said is that this is a bit of a pilot. We have an opportunity to see a single-payer universal system out of an academic construct and out in the real world.
In P.E.I., we have another model, which is a fill-in-the-gaps model, and we have now a committee that's going to be able to look at it and examine the costs and the future path for a single-payer universal system. We're going to be able to compare that and then be able to make informed decisions about the path forward. What I've said is that the conversation needs to be informed by data and real-world results and action.
If I could, I'll take a moment to talk about, for example, why providing contraceptives is such a logical place to start with a single-payer universal plan. You could have somebody in an abusive relationship with a partner who has insurance, and they have to go through their partner in order to get the contraception they need, or you could have a 16-year-old who wants access to contraception but doesn't have parents who would support them in getting access to that contraception.
This is, I think, a very logical place, when you're talking about that experiment, and also because of the number of under-insured folks with diabetes.