Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for that little reminder.
I would also like to remind witnesses that, if the time allowed for the questions and answers is not sufficient for the provision of full answers to the questions put, they are perfectly entitled to provide their answers to the committee in writing, via a letter addressed to the Chair of the legislative committee.
I would like to begin by apologizing for my late arrival. I was held up in the House. I obviously missed a part of your presentation. Fortunately, I arrived as you were explaining that you would be in favour of the amendments that the Liberals would like to propose and under which the breach of a long-term offender supervision order would be included in the list of criminal offences that could trigger a dangerous offender hearing. I was very pleased to hear that.
When the minister of Justice appeared before the committee, several members questioned him repeatedly on the issue of the reversal of the burden of proof and the constitutionality of this aspect. I would like to know if the Canadian Police Association has examined the matter. We, members of the Liberal Party, have many reservations in this regard and are suggesting that instead of there being a reversal of onus, a third finding of guilt for criminal offences designated under the bill automatically trigger an assessment application.