I guess in broad-brush terms I don't disagree with the assumption, but like yourself, for me it's a bit of an assumption. I think one of our problems is we have to build up better databases in terms of what the quantum of the problem is and we have to understand a bit better the extent to which the problem is manifest through ports and between the ports of entry in terms of where the smuggling is occurring.
You're absolute right. Our numbers have been essentially flat over the last few years and the larger proportion of our seizures are basically non-declarations, people who are not necessarily smuggling the weapon, but didn't declare it properly, so we end up seizing it or holding it as a result of that. The number of actual criminal smuggling situations within our seizures is relatively small, and that is an issue that gives me significant concern.
I have a lot of faith in my front-line officers to react to the situations they see at the ports and to conduct secondary inspections. We have consistently had instances when we have found smuggled guns and secreted weapons and we have successes around that. But the fact of the matter is that without significant improvements to our ability to have targeted intelligence on gun-running channels, on gang and organized crime arrangements, we are not going to make the significant advances that I feel we have to make.