I have three comments to make.
First, I agree, the committee should not go back over the work it has already done. However, we do wish to add names to the list of witnesses.
Then, I have two requests for our research service. I would like a table comparing the old Bill C-27 with the additions the government has made. I have asked the Department of Justice to provide it, but I do not hold out any great hope that we will get it. I want to have a table showing the additions to last session's Bill C-27.
In addition, I would someone to make us a table showing how things work in a court of law and the steps needed to declare someone a “dangerous offender”. I want a table that sets out the sequence of events for us, a summary, including the sections of the Criminal Code, of course.
Finally, the reason I wanted a steering committee—though I respect the committee's decision—is that I think that the government has been influenced by the American experience. I wish that we could hear from people from the United States who could tell us whether it worked or not. I would ask the research analyst to prepare for us a list of American scholars, jurists, and people responsible for administering the law who could come and share their experience with us. We know that Bill C-27 deals with matters in which the United States has had a lot of experience. The former clerk has already sent us studies, but I would like us, and the research analyst, to consider the possibility of having those three documents.