Thank you, Mr. White.
I have a question for you. Earlier on, at the beginning of your presentation, you talked about minimum sentences. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that I come from Quebec, where the Lacroix case has acquired great importance.
Lacroix was a broker who had a company that was legally sold by the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec. He had all the Quebec licences but he nevertheless managed to defraud 9,200 people using a very particular system. As for Earl Jones, he had no licence but he dealt with the bank with which he held accounts in trust. It would appear that they worked on the trusts. The third case is that of Mr. Lafleur, which is related to the sponsorship scandal. He had assets that were traced to Belize, where he was living in a mansion. Then, we had the case of Mr. Coffin who was sentenced to less than two years in prison even though he had perpetrated frauds of over a million dollars. He paid the government back one million dollars, but he did not go to jail.
I would like to know what purpose minimum sentences serve? As you can see, in everything I have mentioned, there are legal issues and vast sums of money involved. Do you believe that a two-year minimum sentence will be significant? How will you follow the money trail? In the case of Mr. Lafleur, we know where the assets are but we are having difficulty getting to them. What would you do in such a case?