If I can back up a moment, as you probably know, the way this is structured is that an oral fluid sample could be taken to have reasonable suspicion in order to go further with the investigation into whether the person is impaired by cannabis, for example. That oral fluid test could then eventually lead to a blood sample being taken to prove the amount of THC content in the blood.
Do you believe that a two-step process would be a good idea? We heard testimony earlier that relying on the oral fluid test alone would be enough.