When I asked earlier about what other health services would have to go through such extensive criteria, Ms. Geller I think replied that because the federal government doesn't deal with health services, it's provincial, you don't know about what other criteria, and I accept that.
It leads me to think the Supreme Court of Canada decision didn't dictate that the minister had to have all of these criteria. The minister's role is for an exemption under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, which is federal of course, so that's entirely appropriate. That's why InSite and the Dr. Peter Centre presumably had to come to the federal government.
It's very possible, and in fact it might have been more logical and rational, that the federal legislation could have said if there's provincial approval or support, if there's municipal approval or support, the minister will give the exemption. So with all of this nonsense of a to z, and principles, and this and that, in actual fact the minister's requirement for the exemption could have rested on this is a health service, it's a provincial requirement, and that's where it ends up being.
Am I correct that this would have been an acceptable course of action from the court ruling?