There are two things in addition to what I said in my proposed amendments in the beginning that are really important.
In none of the amendments proposed do I see any connection or any comprehensive approach that addresses the causes of the criminal behaviour. There is nothing that explores the integration of mental health services, addiction treatments and social support to facilitate that sense of rehabilitation. While there is a lot of emphasis on these new conditions, there is nothing to say that these conditions should also work with all of those other services that are really crucial for preventing criminal behaviour.
I also think that there is ambiguity in the language of the bill, especially around the recognizance conditions, and there is a lot left to interpretation and application, which can lead to legal challenges. That's one thing, but also I think that there needs to be some concerted effort so that the system is not laced with the bias that we are currently facing for marginalized communities. There needs to be clarification of the legal language for more consistent and transparent applications.
Those would be two things. If the bill has to pass, those would be the two things that I would say should be considered.
Thank you.