In my remarks, I talked about efficiencies. I think the way to deal with or manage policing costs is not by just throwing a bunch more money at it. This is about finding those kinds of efficiencies. How do we partner with other government services, which are also expensive and consume a lot of tax dollars, to deliver a better product, a more holistic approach to dealing with quality-of-life issues in the community, which includes policing issues and law enforcement?
How do we deal with those issues early on, to prevent that young person from becoming involved in gang activity? We find out who is struggling with a mental health issue and make sure that we collaboratively approach that situation, so it's not the police officer showing up at three o'clock in the morning when that person's in crisis, trying to deal with that issue.
Those are where the opportunities are. In my response to Ms. James' question, I think other opportunities are around: making sure you have police officers doing what fully-trained police officers ought to be doing, and then looking at other alternatives for those other tasks or duties that don't necessarily require a fully-trained police officer to perform.
Examples of that include the cadet program in Winnipeg, where they have hired cadets to do certain things, with some training, at a much lower cost. In Vancouver, we're piloting a community safety program, using civilians with some training who are hired to deal with specific issues that a fully-trained police officer doesn't need to deal with. I think that's the way to approach this going forward.