Well, it's not my study. I've only seen the citations of it, and I don't believe it's a published study, so I don't have access to it.
The second problem we're talking about is how many of those people were not just on bail, but also on bail for firearms offences. So I think we have to be careful about who is the target of this, in terms of public safety. It's people who are charged with a firearms offence, who are going to go to a bail court, who are going to be detained, and who would have been released were it not for this bill—that is, who would be detained because of Bill C-35—but then commit another offence. So you're talking about a minuscule potential impact, because you're talking about this group.
My starting point from the Ontario data I'm aware of is that these folks are going to get detained. So when you change it by reversing the onus.... In reality, the onus is already reversed, as the previous witness has already told you. So you're talking about a minuscule number of people who might now be detained, but otherwise would have been released. Now you're saying, what proportion of that tiny number would commit another offence? This isn't public safety.