I'm not sure how you'd work it into the Criminal Code, other than with respect to the national regulator that has been proposed. To the extent that it doesn't go ahead, the local securities regulators have the power to seize assets. In civil litigation, victims have the power to seize assets, although they have to use people like Mr. Groia and me to do it, so it can be expensive.
In my view, the criminal process is not going to be a process that can take those steps efficiently. I think it's overburdened and under-resourced right now. If you add on the types of things we're talking about that the regulators can do, which is receiverships and freezing money, I don't think it's going to work through the criminal process.
I think you have to encourage the regulatory bodies that have those powers currently to start using them more aggressively, and especially, if you end up with a national regulator, resource that regulator to take those aggressive pre-emptive steps, as I think you called them, to secure the money in advance. Because as we know, the sentencing comes much later, and by then, as Mr. Groia said, the money is long gone.
My initial view is that I don't think the crown's office and the Criminal Code is the place to do it, but the regulatory bodies are.