Justice committee  In the current bill, it's a mandatory alcohol test, but it's a reasonable suspicion for a drug test. As it's working currently with alcohol, we will lose most of the cases. Either we don't detect them to begin with, or we have difficulty in the courts.

Justice committee  Yes, it is. There are several scientific reports that review the success of the Australian story, and it's one, if not the only one, that is using mandatory testing and a two-step oral screening process for both the screening and the collection of an evidentiary sample. So, yes,

Justice committee  Police officers in a roadblock would walk up to the car and administer a roadside screening test, blown into the device. If it's truly mandatory, then they would proceed to request the subjects to stick out their tongue and draw a sample. They'd put it in, take it to the car, pre

Justice committee  No, these are specific for the drug.

Justice committee  Per se limits are difficult if you're going to say a given limit is equal to a given amount of impairment. With alcohol, we could do that, based on the studies from the beginning of time—I think it was in 1969—when we brought forward the legislation in Canada. In the case of ma

Justice committee  It's produced in Germany. We're the—

Justice committee  Yes.

Justice committee  Yes, that's what's been done in Australia for the past 10 years.

Justice committee  That's correct.

Justice committee  It's becoming prevalent in Europe, and to some extent in North America. Urine testing in the workplace isn't really the gold standard; it's the economical standard.

Justice committee  It's cheap, to be crass. It's a simple test to be conducted, but then one has to be concerned about gender specificity and who collects the sample. Then you get into the problem of adulterants.

Justice committee  No, it can be, but I was making the point that urine is typically used in post-mortem cases.

Justice committee  Yes.

Justice committee  There's a lot of work being done on the concurrent use of alcohol and drugs, particularly THC, because it's often prevalent. The question is the impairing effect. Is it 1 plus 1? Is it 1 minus 0.5? Is it 1 plus 2? The effects of alcohol are quite different from the effects of THC

Justice committee  It's a sealed kit. That's the entire kit. The saliva testing kit for roadside use is just that. You take off the collector. It has collection pads, slides over the tongue, goes back into the kit. You press the button to start the test. Five minutes gives you the lines of drugs th