Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to thank you very much for your presentations.
I have to admit that I like Bill C-35, despite the fact that I don't think it will really do much to make Canadians safer in their communities. In fact, based on the information we received, as a general rule if someone is accused of committing a firearms-related offence, the judge considers this as an aggravating factor. In such cases, the accused may be held in prison while awaiting his trial.
What I like about this bill is that when an accused person meets with his legal counsellor or attorney, his representative will not tell him that the onus is on the Crown to prove beyond all reasonable doubt in a bail hearing that the accused constitutes a threat and therefore must be detained until he goes to trial. The lawyer is going to have to tell his client that it is up to him to prove that he should be released. That's a major change in philosophy. And that will probably have a bigger effect on the accused person than the process itself. Currently, the accused can simply off-load the burden of proof, which is actually quite substantial.
I read the Canadian Police Association's brief. There was something that really struck me on page 10 of the section entitled “The Canadian Judicial System Needs a Major Overhaul”. You stated the following:
We contend that the time is long overdue to reform our criminal justice system. An independent review of Canada's sentencing, corrections and parole systems remains a top priority for the Canadian Police Association.
I'd like to know if you feel frustrated at all by the fact that rather than carrying out such an overhaul and making sure an in-depth public inquiry is held on the sentencing, correctional, and parole systems, that a piecemeal approach is being adopted.