I'm not anticipating an unfavourable charter challenge. It seems to me that, first of all, we wouldn't have brought forward the legislation in any case if we didn't think it would withstand a charter challenge. That's the one thing.
As was indicated in response to an earlier question, the department looked very carefully at the decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada in this area, particularly the last three that have been rendered by the Supreme Court in the last 17 years. In one case, we even picked up on the dissenting opinion--as was pointed out by Ms. Besner--that we help codify within the bill itself some of the language that was raised in the Supreme Court. We clarified that to make it much clearer.
I'm not worried about this, in the sense that this builds on other reverse onus provisions with respect to bail. We're just building on that, and we're adding to that. I know those sections have withstood scrutiny up to this point in time, so I fully expect and wouldn't see any problem with our continuing on that. I'm sure that's one of the reasons why your party is supporting it.