Thanks very much.
Thank you all very much for being here. I appreciate your presentations and the briefs that you submitted.
I understand that, from the CBA's point of view, the way this bill deals with administration of justice offences in combatting court delays is well received. Having a diversionary sort of process that administration of justice offences could go through seems like a good idea, and I appreciate your submissions on that.
One thing I'm wondering about, though, is that you recommend a change to that to allow flexibility to the Crown when dealing with situations.... You propose basically that, if there's physical harm to a person, that would not be allowed. Then you talk about emotional harm, and that's not really known, so delete that, or if there's property damage, take that out and just leave it up to the Crown for flexibility.
Am I reading that correctly, that basically what you're saying is, unless the breach is associated with physical harm to a person, you think the Crown should have the ability to put it through diversion? Is that right?