I understand. Thank you.
I just want to say to you, Ms. Heyens, that of all the witnesses who have spoken to us about the section involving routine police evidence—and I think a vast number, if not everyone we've had, has said the same thing, that this is misguided, to put it mildly—I thought your presentation was the most effective. It certainly got my attention. I commend you for that.
You made a couple of points. One that I hadn't heard before and that I'd like you to expand on is that somehow this could force a person to take the stand, that somehow this would violate his or her constitutional right to silence.
I also want to mention, because I only have a short amount of time, that it seems to me that the agreed statement of facts does the trick in virtually all cases anyway, so why do we need this? I'd like you to comment on that.
Last, we heard yesterday from a presenter from the Canadian Bar Association.