My concern is that the whole dangerous offender regime is preventive detention. If we were satisfied with a proportionate sentence, we wouldn't need a dangerous offender designation at all. We have the dangerous offender designation and procedures in the Criminal Code at the moment, but I think I would go back to what was just said, which is that under Bill C-2 as I read it, when the court has found the person to be a dangerous offender, yes, there are those choices, but to read proposed subsection 753(4.1), “the court shall impose a sentence of detention in penitentiary for an indeterminate period unless”, so that there's still a presumption in favour of an indeterminate sentence. So yes, there's the choice, but the judges by this point have already in effect gone past proportionality; they've said they're going to sentence this person for a sentence they don't deserve on the basis of their previous convictions and this particular offence. So I think we're past proportionality, and we're into preventive detention.
On November 13th, 2007. See this statement in context.