Obviously you are raising some of our concerns. However, I am having trouble understanding the solutions you are proposing and what they mean.
I know that the law is imperfect. I believe that an independent committee would certainly be an improvement. It seems to me, however, Mr. Bulmer, that you were saying at the beginning that the neighbours of these protected witnesses should be informed that the person now living in their neighbourhood is dangerous and thus informed of what the person has done. But if we do that, it seems to me that we are disclosing the identity, and the purpose of the program is precisely to give witnesses a new identity, because if we do not do that, in the most serious cases, they could be killed.
Do you really think that we should find a home for a protected witness and then inform the neighbours that he is dangerous, because he has killed several people in the past? First, there are not that many people in Canada who have killed several people. Very often, the kind of crime they committed—In a province like Quebec, I think that people would easily recognize the identity of an individual as soon as they were told what kind of crime the person had committed.
I do not understand this part of your suggestions. However, I know that you have studied the matter extensively, that you have looked at what is done elsewhere and you have specific suggestions to offer us for improving the law. I assure you, Mr. Bulmer, that I would be very happy to receive them in writing.