I have very, very little to add, Mr. Chairman.
If I were a member of this committee, I'd like to know if I were getting money's worth from it. I think you are.
There are all sorts of attributes to it. First of all, the dedication of the members who are in the scientific field is impressive. They've read every paper, their clarity of thought and of expression is first-rate, and the work the committee does is worthwhile.
There's an American statistic that shows DNA testing indicates that in 26% of cases the prime suspect is eliminated. That alone pays for itself when you think of wrongful convictions and the amount that's paid with regard to cases like Sophonow and all that it does to destroy the reputation of the justice system. That alone makes it worthwhile.
The aids to solution of crime are also there and are shown.
What would I say if I were asked what would be an improvement? There are two very simple things. One is an automatic requirement of the taking of samples in all the offences that are now designated. Sometimes, even in the most serious cases, judges do not order the taking of samples. I don't know why that happens. It shows the obduracy and the narrow-mindedness of judges generally, and I'll take full responsibility for that. It just shows how necessary it is to do something like some of the other systems do. This is the crime. It's taken automatically at the penal institution. It's taken away from judges and lawyers and gets down to sensible people doing what's required in order to supply the necessary samples to the bank.
Here is the second thing, if I had my druthers. Sometimes it's so frustrating when you see the report that indicates, no, there isn't a match, but the wrongdoer must be a brother of, father of, or son of someone in the convicted offenders index. Why tie the hands of the investigating forces with something as clear as that? Yet we cannot do anything with regard to that advice without legislative changes.
There are other things, long-range things that I think have to be considered. At some time there should be complete independence of the data bank from the RCMP, to take away any indication or taint of undue influence, just the perception of it. And at some time we're going to have to deal with the missing persons index. It's probably best taken care of through the data bank, with these facilities now, but with the proper safeguards, privacy. The committee does wrestle with the correct balance between proper investigation and the privacy issues that are always there, and the balance has to be kept.
That really is it, other than to say it's one of those things where it's a pleasure to serve on the committee, with the colleagues on the committee. It's a very small amount that I can help you with. I'm probably better at answering questions than anything else.