Thank you.
The reason I actually brought that up--it's been brought up here a number of times at committee--is that I did find a contradiction, Mr. Mann, in what you said. You mentioned how dangerous and serious cannabis-impaired driving is, and yet you advocated Bill C-17.
I just want to move on to something else here, to defining the word “drug”. I hear it almost every time a witnesses comes here; there's much discussion about having too much coffee, too many aspirins, and so on and so forth. This bill does not define drug. Would any of you care to take a stab at defining what a drug is, and where this bill might go with that?
In particular, I think there are two things that have potential here, and that is a schedule of drugs, as we would have anywhere else, or some kind of category of impaired substances or something like that. I think we're all struggling with exactly what drugs we are talking about, how much, whether or not people are impaired by them, whether or not they just have a quantity in their body at the time from some other use at some other time.
CCSA, perhaps.