On crime prevention, that was one of the points Mr. Fletcher raised, quite rightly.
In cities like Winnipeg, crime prevention, reduction, and combat is a three-pronged approach. Only one prong has to do with policing, and it involves arrest, detaining, and turning over to the authorities. The other two prongs have a lot more to do with social services and access to things in our community. Why does a young person make a decision to do a break-and-enter or get involved with drugs in the first place? All of the amenities available to that person within our community come into play.
We know that the Canadian sport policy includes specific research that shows quite clearly linkages between the amount of opportunity available to a young person in a city or community and what role they end up playing in our society. That's a common-sense idea that most of us could understand. But in a discussion like this, we all have to make the commitment to provide that infrastructure so they can access it.
Your second comment, about the flexibility of recreational infrastructure in our communities, is a good one as well, because every community has different needs. The answer may lie in specific programs from the federal government that involve a municipal component in terms of choice and access--maybe even on a percentage basis.
For example, we are just starting to build an indoor soccer facility for the city of Winnipeg because we didn't have a four-plex. That's our particular issue in Winnipeg, but it might not be the answer in every community across Canada, because they might have different issues they have to address specifically. If the programs you administer from the federal government level have that choice built in, you might indeed answer some of those challenges.