Let me ask you a question. I'm not sure that I completely followed the discussion when you talked about the vagueness of the words “substantial likelihood”. As I read clause 4 of Bill C-4, which amends subsection 29(2) of the act, it says:
A youth justice court judge or a justice may order that a young person be detained in custody only if the young person has been charged with a serious offence and the judge or justice is satisfied, on a balance of probabilities
(a) that there is a substantial likelihood that [he will flee] or commit [another] serious offence
There's a “serious offence” there again, and there is:
(b) no condition or combination of conditions of release that would reduce...the likelihood of [a secondary offence being committed]
and
(3) the onus of satisfying the youth [judge] is on the Attorney General [or the prosecutor].