Thank you.
I understand certain factors very well. Knowing about the local situation is important, certainly. However, we are talking about providing scientific proof showing a medical advantage, and we already have that proof. Earlier, I mentioned certain facts. For instance, I said to the minister that in Montreal, 68% of drug users are infected with hepatitis C, and 18% are HIV carriers. We already have this evidence, and we know that preventing one case of hepatitis C or HIV can be equivalent to the whole budget of a supervised injection site.
We also have general information on infectious diseases and overdoses related to the use of illegal substances. In my opinion, certain criteria are not necessary, since we already have that information.
Why, in this case, did you include those requirements in the bill? Why slow down the process and impede it by asking people to meet criteria, knowing what we already know?