Thank you.
In terms of your first question, I think we're concerned about any barriers that are there. Essentially, what you've heard is that a pardon isn't something that's just nice to have; a pardon is instrumental in the lives of these three gentlemen as they move forward and build stronger, healthier lives for themselves, their children, their families, and their community.
And frankly, I don't see that there should be any barrier put in place, that there is anything to be gained by making it more difficult for Barrett, for Chris, for Taz, or for the 400 or 500 or thousands of other Canadians to move forward in a crime-free life.
At the John Howard Society some of the people we work with have committed some very serious offences, have spent a lot of time in prison, and they too would have this opportunity. And it never comes at one point. I've met people who have seen the light after their first sentence. I've met people who have seen the light after 25 years. But they are working in the community, they are crime-free, they are not hurting other people.
I can't predict when that's going to happen. I want to be able to say to all of my clients, “You have that opportunity at some point. If you don't break the law in the future, if you don't hurt people in the future, you can put this behind you and move forward.” That is a huge piece of hope for someone, and I don't think it should be taken away.
You asked me where I would draw the line. I say that the line is fine where it is. The number of people.... Ninety-six percent of people who get a pardon don't have it revoked. And some of those who have it revoked have it revoked for something that occurred before the pardon was granted--a past offence that the police have found out about--as in the case of Graham James, for example.
I say that the line is fine where it is. If someone is crime-free for five years from the end of their sentence, statistically they are not going to commit another crime.
The people we see, the repeat offenders--and I work with a lot of repeat offenders--don't wait five years to commit another crime. They're doing it within five weeks or five months.
I think the line is fine where it is and there is no need, from a safety point of view, to change that.