It's precisely the track two that did that. We did that after careful consultation with a number of different communities, including representatives of people living with disabilities.
The 90-day assessment period was meant to be a sufficiently long period, so that in the case of a catastrophic accident someone would have time, after that initial period, to reflect on what happened and what might be possible.
As I've mentioned, there is a criterion that the person must be made aware of what the possible supports are, have meaningfully thought about that, and have discussed those thoughts and alternatives for support with a practitioner.
Again, there is the criterion that there must be assessments from two people. One of those people has to have an expertise in the field. On Mr. Thériault's previous question, we kept that flexible. In some places—such as the north—they felt that having two experts in a particular medical field, for example, might be an impediment. We made that flexible. Obviously, it can be up to provinces to make that more stringent if they have the resources to do so.