Absolutely. I thank you for bringing that reality to our attention here.
The other thing I wanted to ask you was about number six of your eight points. To refresh your memory, that was the one about the charging provisions in British Columbia, New Brunswick and Quebec.
We've heard other witnesses already tell the committee that we have a charge approval process that the Crowns are required to do. That has led to many fewer trials because the Crown has to be satisfied that there is “a substantial likelihood of conviction”. Routinely, Crowns say there isn't, and cases don't proceed.
In itself that would be one of the best ways, I suggest. Others at least have suggested, and I put to you for your comment, to deal with the clogging up of our courts, if there was a check between the police and the courtroom. Do you have any comments on that? Number six says:
Usually Crown or police (depending on the province) lay charges only when they believe there to be a reasonable chance of obtaining a conviction. Presumably, the justice system should then take its course. What is the point of having a justice system when the state's overarching objective becomes to resolve as many cases as possible before they ever go to trial?
I'm saying it's not a reasonable chance of obtaining a conviction; it has to meet the standard that there's a substantial likelihood of conviction. If we went to that higher standard, don't you think that would have an impact on generating less business for the courts of the land?