Statistics—the word I would rather use is evidence—that it is a problem. One of the ways you find out is that there are statistics showing hat bail provisions as currently structured are being abused.
I'm not sure what Mr. Lomer's position was. I represent the national council, and we have viewpoints from right across the country, as opposed to Toronto, a big city. It might be different in Saskatchewan. It might be different in Nunavut. So we feel, on behalf of the council, that there's a substantive, principled approach and that we cannot support this bill.
I understand, Mr. Moore, that there are people who are saying that we need to change this because it's a number one problem in Toronto. I see what the mayor said in Toronto. But is the mayor saying it because he knows that the tertiary ground, as applied right now, doesn't work, as opposed to saying that we have to get tougher on these big-city problems and send a message to those few who abuse the criminal justice system and commit these offences?
I am saying, on behalf of the Canadian Council, that the equipment is already there in the tertiary ground. But if you are specifically looking at those people, then the two additions you have introduced in the legislation in terms of looking at public confidence in the administration of justice—if it's a gun crime and it's a minimum three-year or four-year sentence—if you add those to the tertiary ground, that tightens it up a lot more and sends the message out, without fundamental change to the onus.