I agree with my colleague wholeheartedly. In addressing the overdose crisis, there is no either-or: It's not either harm reduction or treatment; it's not either safer supply or recovery.
As I've said, and I will repeat, we need a full continuum of care. health care interventions and services to help those who are most vulnerable and struggling with substance use.
With regard to your question, Mr. Johns, we've contacted all of our programs on safer supply that are expiring. It is my full intention to have our department review and renew those programs with proper mitigation measures in place with regard to concerns that have been raised on diversion.
We are collecting data and evidence through CRISM. That is exactly why SUAP exists. It's so that we have evidence to show if these measures are working. We know that those who are in safer supply programs begin a process of stabilization. They begin to make better health choices for themselves. It reduces criminal activity. It reduces someone going on the street to look for alternatives, to pay for illicit drugs that can cause them harm.
We have to meet people where they are at in the moment when they reach out for help. That is why safer supply is such an important piece of the puzzle when we go to save lives. We cannot do an either-or. We cannot stigmatize people when they actually step up and ask for help. We can't turn them away, saying that it's either this or nothing. They will die of an overdose if we do not meet them where they are at.
I say, as the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions, that my sole focus is to save lives.