Actually, I want to add one last point. I appreciate the chair's allowing me to take a breath and think.
I was very proud during the last election campaign when the leader of my party, Pierre Poilievre, said he would use the notwithstanding clause in connection with the bail and sentencing legislation in some very discrete cases.
If you have an absurd situation where a violent repeat offender is out again and again, a scenario we have contemplated in this committee repeatedly, that would precisely be the type of absurdity that responsible government should address and prevent. It's entirely consistent, intellectually, historically and legally, to say that it's not willy-nilly. It's when it's government priority, when it's essential, when there's absurdity and when it's politically responsible, and there will be accountability. In all of that, decency will be maintained.
It's very regrettable that we can't agree on the use of the notwithstanding clause because we can no longer agree on decency in politics. That is a new thing, which maybe is even worse than all of this.
Thank you.