Okay.
Ms. McCuaig, first of all, let's say there's no question that victims deserve more respect in the situation that you presented, obviously. What we're grappling with here is that we don't have the whole picture at this committee. We don't do the costing, and there's no law here about the implementation of rehabilitation programs or early intervention to get at dysfunctional situations beforehand. It's just the way our system is. We deal with the end consequences, with the sentence phase.
To focus on that for a moment--because I agree with everything you've said with respect to stopping crime before it gets to be a problem in the family--with respect to deterrence, your comment was that the time of incarceration wasn't long enough in some cases. I gather that what you're saying is that the longer the serious offenders, like the ones you mentioned, stay incarcerated and receive programming or some sort of regimentation or something, the better the chance that they will be, to use your phrase, “turned around”. To “turn the youth around”, in my thought, is code for “rehabilitate this person”.
Victims should also be afraid that criminals get out. We have to be worried, as a group, about what we are turning out if we just put them away and leave them there. I think that's our biggest worry. The solution of taking them out of the population is a short-term solution if it's only for a year or two or even three. Do you agree, then, that the programming in incarceration is a pretty important piece of the puzzle there?