You made a very interesting point about the laying of the charge and the possibility that it might be much more likely that the charges of torture, of this type of torture, would be laid against an individual to encourage them to plead guilty to a lesser charge here. I guess that's one of the issues. I believe you're the first one to have raised that.
You pointed out something towards the end of your testimony with respect to the whole question of deterrence. I would be of the belief that somebody involved with this kind of activity is not going to be deterred one way or the other regardless of how it's classified under the Criminal Code. However, people who are the victims of this would be much more likely to identify it, and you talked about whether they would come forward and bring a charge. Somebody who has gone through this kind of criminal activity is more likely in an everyday lexicon to call it torture than to say that they are a victim of aggravated assault. It might be more likely for the person to say they were tortured by an individual, and that's a crime in Canada.
We do everything we can, obviously, to try to encourage people to report all crimes. I suppose I'm not making the argument for the individual who initiated this bill. However, someone who reports it, who is a victim of torture, would use the common name for this kind of activity rather than saying they were a victim of an aggravated assault. It might make it a little easier for people to understand and to feel more comfortable coming forward. That's just a thought.