To my understanding, Paul Bernardo, I think, has been given the dangerous offender designation, but it is very rarely used. I don't know of any violent criminal other than Paul Bernardo who has been designated as a dangerous offender. I believe the courts, the crown prosecutor, the judges feel that once they are sentenced to life imprisonment, what's the point of a dangerous offender clause?
With regard to post-traumatic stress, it is very, very difficult. Every victim responds differently. Some victims have such a hard time attending any of the parole board hearings that they would prefer to be possibly in a different room. I don't understand how, in a country as great as Canada is, we even have to consider the well-being of victims a maximum of 25 years after the crime. As Susan mentioned, we've all gone through the 15 years; now it's the 25 years, and 25 years is not very long at all. It's just hard to believe. After 33 years of doing this, I still find it hard to believe.
But it is getting better. I don't understand individuals who are more concerned with the charter issues in relation to legislation than they are in relation to victims. We have decades yet of victim awareness to be brought forward. We're on the right path.