Thank you very much, Chair. I'll be very quick. I have one question for Ms. Craig and one for our witness from Edmonton.
You mentioned a universal definition in your speech. It seems to me that we as a society have failed to some degree. If we think about it from the perspective of raising a child, we don't give them the bike and then just tell them to go and ride it, right? We're with them the whole time. When they start to walk or crawl, we don't just say, “Well, fill your boots, and we'll see what happens first.” We're with them.
But all of a sudden, computers came along in the 1990s or 2000s, and we said, “Here, have a computer and we won't monitor you. We'll just let it go.” That's basically what we've done. I'm curious about what your thoughts are on a universal definition.
Then quickly to our witness from Edmonton with regard to tools that police need, as a retired police officer, I don't know if these amendments do anything for the police with regard to new tools. I would suggest that somewhere down the road the responsibility will be handed to the police, and at some point in time the general public will feel that the police have failed, because they will have been unable to do what they needed to do in the Criminal Code.... It goes beyond that. I'd like to hear your answer.