We are getting a little giddy as the end of the session approaches.
Seriously though, I would like to ask you the following question. We can understand the government's intention, but you must admit, as a man of science and a university professor, and as someone with a Ph.D in criminology, that there is no hard evidence that would lead us to believe that justices would grant bail to just about anyone who appears before them. On the contrary, defence attorneys and all of those who have appeared in court have made it clear to us that people are not regularly released on bail if they have committed a crime using a firearm.
Finally, will you not admit, based on scientific evidence and hard data, that the government did not base its bill on any available data?