I guess the difficulty is with respect to dealing with the youth motor vehicle thieves. We've had some success with our Winnipeg auto theft suppression strategy, and I indicated in my comments that we have had a 75% reduction in auto theft. So we achieved some progress on that. But to answer your question directly, in terms of getting into whether it should be a number of repeat offences that qualify, there are issues that come into play, including issues of proof. The difficulty from Manitoba's perspective and the reason we've advanced a very straightforward argument that there should be no presumptions in terms of both pre-trial detention and custodial sentencing is that where we've got into trouble with the YCJA is in trying to figure out special rules and criteria that prosecutors have to jump through, as it were, in order to get custody in a particular situation. I think it's very difficult to structure it, because there is always going to be the case that doesn't quite fit, and then you have an issue of public confidence in the justice system.
From our perspective in Manitoba, our view since 2006 has been that we shouldn't tinker with the wording of a presumption or some type of requirement. I think we should recognize that we should never say never to a custodial sentence for the out-of-control youth in an extreme case, and that either the definition of a serious offence should be very broad or, as Manitoba has recommended, there shouldn't be a presumption at all.