Thank you.
Mr. MacDonald, I found your testimony very instructive with respect to the list of offences that would not qualify, or at least where there would be a presumption against custody. You named a number of them: theft under $5,000, fraud under $5,000, and escape from lawful custody, all offences, I think you said, that young offenders are statistically very likely to commit.
So as I read the current legislation and the proposed amendments in Bill C-4, I stumble on the definition of “serious offence”, which is what I think we're debating. If you were advising the federal Attorney General rather than the Attorney General of Nova Scotia, how would you define “serious offence” to include many if not most of the offences that are currently omitted but you think ought to be included?