Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Muise, for being here.
I think this is one of the cases—and I'd like to know whether you agree—for which, if ever there was a time when cost shouldn't be a factor, it's in these cases of dangerous offenders. You'd be best placed to talk about this, but with your organization working on abuse awareness and victims' issues, I look at the associated cost to society when these guys are victimizing.
We've heard evidence already on the recidivism rates. If someone has had a second offence, a third offence, a fourth offence, especially when they're of a sexual nature, the likelihood goes up of their reoffending. You gave testimony that in many cases that's what we're talking about: dangerous offenders.
Maybe you can talk a bit about that and the cost to society—I think there's agreement, and I'd like your comment on this also—when someone who, after the Johnson decision, because of the threshold that's in place, meets the requirement to be a dangerous offender but does not get the status of becoming a dangerous offender and therefore eventually is out in the community.