Mr. Brayford, I want to make a statement first and then I want to challenge you.
What I see and what I strongly believe has happened in Ontario—I haven't studied the rest of the provinces, so I can't comment on them—is that our courts, in effect, our judges, have been forced to accept the two-beer defence. I hear that from some of the judges. When you study not only Carter but the cases that have flowed out of Carter and have occurred subsequent to Carter, when judges have rejected this defence, they've been appealed. The Court of Appeal for Ontario has been very strong on this and has effectively said the judges can't reject it. That's what the provincial court judges right across the province believe at this point. Based on the Carter decision and subsequent ones from the Court of Appeal, that's the reality in the province.
It's not like we're precluding evidence. It's evidence that absolutely has to come in, has to be accepted, even when the trial judges don't believe it themselves, based on the decisions flowing from Carter. That's the reality in Ontario.
I want to challenge you, and I have to say to you that you blew some of your credibility when you made this point. You have a person who has gotten on the stand and said—and the judge has been forced to accept this evidence—that the breathalyzer is wrong because they only had two beers. How are you going to expect the judge to then convict him of impaired driving? If you have to accept that the person only had two beers, how can you then convict him of impaired driving? That just doesn't happen. That's never been my experience. If you can't get him on the breathalyzer in those circumstances, then you're not going to get him on impaired.
I really had some difficulty with your description of the fallback, and I know the Court of Appeal for Ontario has said the same thing. The court has said to forget about the breathalyzer charge but to convict him of impaired, after saying that you have to accept the evidence of the two-beer defence. It's impractical. That's not what happens in the courtroom. If you beat 0.08, you're going to beat impaired too.