The difference between the existing provision and the proposed section 3 is that there is a highlighting of protection of the public, and it is flagged and given prominence in the new definition for section 3, but how protection to the public is delivered remains consistent with the previous objectives. It's done through holding young people accountable for wrongdoing in a proportionate and fair way, supporting the rehabilitation of the young person and trying to prevent crime in the first place.
Your second question deals with the “diminished moral blameworthiness”. The genesis of that is the Supreme Court of Canada's ruling in Regina v. D.B., in which the Supreme Court determined that there was a principle of fundamental justice that's applicable to young people, and that is that young people are entitled to the presumption of diminished moral blameworthiness and culpability. What this provision does is simply incorporate stated law that was set by the Supreme Court. That's now a constitutionally protected principle under section 7 of the charter, so it is simply an articulation of the existing law.