It goes back to the notion of the quality of the partnership between law enforcement and the affected communities. There has to be a level of confidence that sharing that information is going to be treated in a respectful and constructive way.
However, I also, frankly, have to flag a problem. People can have very subjective views about what constitutes a hate crime, and victims or alleged victims of those kinds of crimes also introduce their own subjective reality or perspective on it, which is why I think it is so important for this committee to either establish or encourage the creation of consistent and uniform criteria for what constitutes and what doesn't constitute hate crimes.
We in the Jewish community have a lot of experience with this. There are those, for example—and it's not a secret—even within the Jewish community, frankly, who are critical of one or another policy of a particular government of the State of Israel. Does criticism of that policy constitute anti-Semitism? I think our consensus, and certainly the IHRA consensus, is that it doesn't. Even though it may offend me personally or I may be aggrieved by it, it doesn't constitute anti-Semitism in the sense of a hate crime.
Similarly, I think that when we reflect on what we're going to build by way of a set of definitions and criteria for what constitute actionable offences, we have to be very precise and clear, and review them, because things change.