Thank you.
Then I also want to ask you about some of these disclosure questions, because they are rather difficult. We've heard some comments about the fact that judges sometimes err on the side of more disclosure than is necessary and that sometimes defence counsel are just out on fishing expeditions. You've heard that phrase, I'm sure, more than once in the years you've been on the bench.
The idea was that Stinchcombe seems to have a very low threshold for disclosure requirements. I'm not as familiar with it as I should be, but the idea was suggested that if anything is...as long it's not irrelevant—put it that way—the onus is on disclosure.
I wonder whether you have any observations about whether it would be legitimate and possible to tighten that up a little bit, in order to reduce the disclosure burden on crowns.