Thank you very much, gentlemen, for your input here today. Let me start with Mr. Wood.
You pointed out on a number of occasions that people who did not meet the chemical test, whether the .08 or the number with respect to the residual level of marijuana, won't be charged. I appreciate that it has been a long time since I've been in criminal court, but for example, the individual may show as only .07. Yes, he or she is not guilty of having violated that particular section of the Criminal Code but can be charged under the impaired driving sections of the Criminal Code. Again, it's a question of evidence. If the officer or whoever in charge says that the car was wobbling all over the place, or the individual can't walk straight, that's quite apart from the actual blood levels. That's a separate offence.
You seem to be indicating that this is not the case, that in fact people who are below the levels established for either cannabis or alcohol somehow won't be charged. I can see that they won't be charged under the specific section, but the impaired driving is a separate offence.
What are your thoughts on that?