Thank you.
Thank you, Dr. Waller. That's quite a dossier and CV you have. We appreciate your experience on this bill.
I don't know how many more questions now we can ask. We've asked a number of other witnesses about this, and I'm gathering your position, really, is that while this might be a positive signal in the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, we probably need to look at other ideas, other solutions, and other bodies of legislation or policy development to really hit the nail on the head with this. I'll ask you a couple of points, maybe, just out of curiosity, to help shape this and future discussions that our committee is bound to have.
The $83 billion that's borne by crime victims—is that measured by direct victimization, or do they take into account indirect? What I'm getting to is how we create a determination of claimants so that it doesn't go from the reasonable to the ridiculous when you have claimants coming forward looking for restitution, and also how we can get full perspective on whether or not in this country we're measuring that number properly and giving it its true weight.
Just to give an illustration of it, if somebody breaks into a pharmacy and disrupts the operation of that pharmacy and the business has to be closed, you create a number of victims after that point—the people who can't access those services, who might be in desperate need of those services. Arguably we would include them in a victim picture. That might not be where that $83 billion starts to be calculated.
Maybe I can just get your thoughts on whether that would be a reasonable calculation to include in that number a certain level of indirect clients. Do we do that, and to what degree do we do that?