Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I think the honourable member is correct when he states that the current policies--I think this is the case not only for the RCMP but other police services--are not based on the notion that the only time you would deploy a conducted energy device is in a situation where you would otherwise use a firearm. It is a device that, based on a threat assessment, officers might deploy where they would otherwise resort to other means of less than lethal force.
I don't purport to be an expert in the use of force, and there certainly are lots of people in the RCMP who are, but my understanding is that the only time a taser would be deployed, where the other choice would be to use a firearm, would be in cases where there is another officer right there who will use a firearm if the deployment of a taser is not effective to gain control of the individual.
With respect to excited delirium, I understand a number of qualified individuals have concluded that deaths resulted from excited delirium, and those include findings by coroners in a number of cases, as well as other medical practitioners. I would certainly agree our officers are not in a position to make a diagnosis with respect to excited delirium. I think there are some characteristics, which we have read about, that are or can be indicative of excited delirium.
I understand medical opinion suggests the best way to gain control of someone suffering from excited delirium is to deploy a conducted energy device and get the person restrained and get the person medical attention.