Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'll skip by the hypotheticals, which are all included, of course, in the article, and simply say this: the opportunity for an application to be made and the onus to be reversed for an individual, as was pointed out earlier, who could have but a single prior contact with the police, in which he or she exerted no physical force whatsoever but was a party to two or three of the primary designated offences and got the requisite sentence, would then make this person a presumptive dangerous offender on the next occasion.
As a defence counsel, it would be incumbent upon me to spend your taxpayers' dollars to explore every single possible avenue of refuting what he is now presumed to be, including all of the records, all of the witnesses, and all the things that we now entrust to the police and to the crowns. I hope to be able to expand on that in the questions.