Thank you very much, sir.
I think the disruption powers, as described, are necessary. As I indicated earlier, they offer, low-cost alternatives, as Mr. Boisvert beautifully phrased it. These can be very important in moving decisively when there may be a risk situation developing.
I couldn't help but reflect upon the death of Warrant Officer Patrice Vincent in St-Jean-sur-Richelieu. The perpetrator was, as you may recall, Mr. Chairman, the subject of fairly extensive efforts that were apparently to no avail. I think the RCMP brought in some Muslims who were attempting to assist in the situation, maybe an imam, and so on. In the end, we saw what the result was. Maybe this would have been unavoidable even with certain disruption possibilities; maybe there would have been peace bond options under the new legislation. It's very difficult to say.
When it does come to issues like disruption, however, it would be very important that the system be capable of following the execution of disruption exercises and operations, as authorized by federal warrant, as I think we're contemplating in this legislation. It's not entirely clear to me that we necessarily have all of that back-end emphasis in hand yet, but I would be optimistic that it can be properly shaped.