Okay, you can have some conclusions.
My conclusion from all of this is that electronic monitoring is worth trying as a means of adding value to what the probation service has traditionally tried to do with offenders. Use electronic monitoring in an integrated way, rather than a stand-alone way, except in special circumstances like bail.
Home detention under electronic monitoring can be an onerous measure, and sometimes it's useful to have the support of a social worker or a probation officer to help someone get through the experience of electronic monitoring.
Compliance rates with electronic monitoring can be high. It depends on both the efficacy of the surveillance technology and the swiftness and legitimacy of the response to any violation, and it also depends on the nature of the subsequent punishment. Although there isn't a lot of research worldwide to justify the use of GPS in empirical terms, I think GPS tracking does have a place with high-risk offenders, and I think the experiments that are currently being done with respect to persistent and prolific offenders are just as worthy of our attention as is its use with the more traditional group of offenders—the sex offenders—who are normally put in the frame for GPS tracking.
That was all I wanted to say. Thank you very much.