You have raised another issue that concerns me, Minister Day: I am referring to the accusations made against the 17 persons who have been arrested recently in Toronto. I cannot imagine any criminal law allowing for people who have taken part in such a conspiracy not to be liable to the most severe penalties according to the law of the land. These people had meetings in order to prepare a bomb attack similar to the one we have seen in Southern United States. I cannot imagine any criminal law system that would not consider this as a very grievous act. You added that the Anti-terrorism Act had been applied in that case and that it had been quite useful.
In what way would the Anti-terrorism Act be more helpful to the attorneys who will prosecute them and the judges who will judge them once they have been found guilty? How will it help them determine an appropriate sentence for what is truly a murder conspiracy? What added benefit does the Anti-terrorism Act provide to the judge? What added benefit does it provide to the prosecutors? Clearly, this is a case when an infiltration has taken place. In passing, I imagine that when such an infiltration occurs, it is orchestrated in a way that no harm can come to the public. I would like you to confirm that, but this is not really the question I'm asking you. I am asking what does the Anti-terrorism Act add?