Yes.
In terms of some of the dissents in the Supreme Court rulings, specifically in Pearson—I believe Madam Justice McLaughlin was one of the dissenting justices in that decision, and she highlighted that the section should have failed because it didn't distinguish between small-time drug traffickers and large-scale drug traffickers.
With respect to Bill C-35, I can indicate to the committee that the firearms trafficking and smuggling offences targeted under Bill C-35 are the more serious offences that target that kind of activity. There are lesser included offences in the Criminal Code; for example, “unlawful transfer”, which I believe is at around section 102 or 103. There is also an equivalent “illegal importing” offence, which doesn't amount to as serious an offence as the smuggling offence.
The point I'm trying to communicate is that there are other offences that are available to address less serious breaches as criminal activity, though certainly where there is something that is of great concern to law enforcement, tools are available in the Criminal Code, and would be with a new reverse onus provision, for serious firearms traffickers and smugglers.
If you would like me to point out those offences in the code, I could. They're all in the area between sections 99 and 103.