Thank you very much, Chair. It's really good to be back in my old stomping grounds in the public safety committee.
I'd really like to thank our witnesses for helping guide us through this really important subject. I think your expertise is going to be very valuable to us in issuing a report with recommendations.
Detective Inspector Wade, I'd like to turn to you first. It's along the lines of the question you received from Mr. Bittle.
I think you're getting a peek at the conundrum that we, as policy-makers, find ourselves in. I've had experience on the standing committee on justice and I've taken some deep dives into the Criminal Code. There are many provisions in the Criminal Code that allow for sentences to be harsher or lighter, depending on the circumstances, such as whether there are aggravating factors. There's a fair amount of freedom.
Similarly, when it comes to Crown prosecutors, the executive branch—in this case, the Ontario provincial government—has to be very careful to not get involved in the operational details. There has to be that prosecutorial independence that's so very necessary.
Of course, we value that our courts are independent.
I'm looking at the Criminal Code as a legislator. Do you want to take an opportunity to delve into it a bit more deeply?
What is more of a deterrent? Is someone who is thinking of stealing a car thinking about the sentence they will receive, or are they thinking more that the risk outweighs the chance of them actually getting caught doing it?
Do you think more resources are needed in our police operations' intelligence-gathering? Do we have to rely simply on the Criminal Code, or is it probably a mix of both?