I just want to get back to this drug treatment court and the efficacy thereof. Unless we've been given bad material--just kidding over there--there are various studies that suggest they are effective. I see the Latimer, Morton-Bourgon, Chrétien study--with a name like Chrétien you have to go with that on this side, right? Cost-effectiveness was not indicated in that study, but they do reduce crime among offenders with substance abuse programs.
Our briefing notes, from what I've read anyway, indicate that these things work. In the United States they've been in existence since 1969. Only a very small percentage of program graduates reoffend.
We need to know here. Are we getting bad information? Maybe you have other information that completely refutes this by the peer review process. How are we wrong in saying or believing as a matter of policy and it's in fact a matter of our laws that the DTCs work? If they didn't work, I don't think I'd be as supportive of this bill or that part of the bill that gives the offender the chance to go to the DTC to avoid the mandatory minimum. As I said, this is a very unusual mandatory minimum. I've been here since they started rolling them out when they first got on the podium.
Go ahead.