I have three short questions, two for Dr. Doob and one for Mr. Muise. I agree that every person must do his or her fair share.
As you may know, Dr. Doob, a National Crime Prevention Strategy was adopted in Canada about ten years ago. In the opinion of the Bloc Québécois, this strategy should receive a funding boost of 25%. In actual fact, the strategy is comprised of three programs, two of which target community groups, while the third provides tools to prevent crime, particularly on a national scale.
Have you examined the impact of this strategy? You don't need to convince us that the figures are what they are, since you're the one who tabled them.
You also told us that practically speaking, a person charged with a firearms-related offence has little chance of being released on bail. Whether the outcome is positive or negative, we need to look elsewhere for solutions to the scourge of firearms-related offences.
In your opinion, has the National Crime Prevention Strategy—I suppose we should be talking in terms of a Canadian strategy, because we're dealing with “nations” in the plural sense, although that's a whole other discussion—produced some positive results?
Then, I'd like to ask Mr. Muise why he questions the statistics on the effective crime rate in Canada.