I should say that the provisions around the use of extrajudicial measures for diversion have been one of the real hallmarks of success of this legislation. As a country, we've moved a lot of less serious offenders out of the courts and are dealing with them in programs. As it so happens, I'm a volunteer in the program in Kingston. We have a focus, as do many other programs, on restorative justice, on bringing victims to meet with offenders and trying to serve the needs of victims in that way. These are very important provisions. They have financial implications.
By the way, of course I agree with your comment that judges already can and do take account of a record of extrajudicial sanctions, as you pointed out. But I worry that this provision and the later provision around extrajudicial sanctions and police records will tend to discourage police from using these provisions. It seems to send a message to police saying that we're using this too much—and I don't think we are, as a country. In fact, we continue to have a relatively high rate of use of courts. Many countries have significantly more diversion than we do, so if anything, we should be diverting more of these less serious cases.
So I am very concerned about these provisions. In fact, when you add up the large number of cases that they will impact, if they are or more of them are sent to courts, there will be a significant impact on costs, delay, and in that sense victim suffering in the justice system. They will be counterproductive.