Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Richards, for your presentation today. I think you've been really responding to the questions that have been asked of you in an excellent, detailed, and logical way and I very much appreciate that.
I just want to preface my remarks by saying that while I am the first one to defend the right of anyone to wear clothing appropriate to circumstances and according to their beliefs, I don't have any patience for anyone who shows up masked or disguised to any event where it's clear there is illegal conduct going on.
If you are in the midst of an unlawful assembly or a riot, and people are running around with black masks on and doing illegal things, it just does not make sense to me to believe that anyone with an ounce of respect for the law—or intelligence—would disguise themselves so they couldn't be photographed with no other ulterior purpose, so I just don't buy that.
I was interested in your remarks about what happened in Vancouver. Certainly, the fact that there were 15,000 criminal acts identified—I hadn't realized—and that the police were only able to charge 85 people I think is very striking. Many people were I think unjustly and unduly critical of the police because of the time and care they took in their investigation. I know much was written about that and the fact that it took time.
I'd like to ask you this. If your bill had been in place, can you give me some specifics or talk about how it would have helped the police in bringing to justice the perpetrators of these crimes in Vancouver during that riot?