Yes. In Ontario we actually have seen that, because if you plead guilty in first 90 days, you can take advantage of the interlock system and get your licence back early. There is a lesser prohibition. There are a few problems with that. It's available only to people who have money. That's a problem. The other problem is that, on the one hand, it can resolve things but it can also act as a bit of a perverse incentive to maybe plead guilty when you're not guilty.
One of the things you could do—which would be really great and which would clear up the courts and be equitable financially and just in terms of fairness—is to look at the mandatory minimum prohibition periods and whether there could be exceptions built into that to allow people to keep on working or to do other valuable things under some conditions that might actually help resolve files, take into account disparate income levels, and make sure that people don't lose their jobs. I had a client who was unable to drive his wife to cancer treatment because of the minimum prohibition. He was the only one who drove and he lived in the country. There could be some fairness introduced in that measure as well, and I think that might help resolve matters, because there might be an incentive there for everyone to resolve.