Just as an aside, we get reports from hospitals and from health care professionals. From the hospitals, we get reports on the number of deaths as a result of a person just going to the hospital, so there's a balanced view. We know that the hospital's a very good place to go because lives are saved, but we also have concerns when people go there and something negative happens.
I guess this committee's responsibility is to make sure that you folks are on your toes and doing the right thing, but I think Canadians need to know the good things as well as the bad things. When we haul a police agency before us, we need to give Canadians a balanced view. That's the premise upon which that question was asked.
Now I'd like to go to the words “public safety”. Thank you for articulating some of the issues surrounding the setting of policy and what is referred to, at least in my world, as micromanaging. Policy is usually a general overview. When we're talking about public safety and the use of the taser, you cannot give in policy every incident where a taser should or should not be used. But would I be correct in saying that when you are in your training mode, that's where the officer learns the specifics of public safety and the dos and don'ts?
I wonder if you could elaborate a little bit on how policy translates, because when I ask these questions, I always try to ask them in terms of the fact that Canadians are watching this committee and its deliberations and they'd like to know some of the facts. Usually they just hear the negatives from these things. Could you just run through the difference between policy and its translation into training and actual everyday operations?