Just that one of the issues raised was how this compared to U.S.-style legislation. Again, in the U.S. there are three offences that automatically trigger a life sentence. This does not do that. This is designed very deliberately to narrow the scope towards the target individuals who typically are going to be subject to a dangerous offender application, and in many cases a successful one.
This allows for a viable procedure whereby the Crown can in fact avoid a protracted and expensive hearing and basically go to the same result they were going to anyway, which then leads to the real issue at the heart of these hearings since Johnson, which is, what is the appropriate sentence to give an individual who has in fact met the criteria of section 753.1?