Justice committee  The bill doesn't specify that reasons must be on the record, but most of the courts are courts of record, so I would assume that they would record them. That doesn't preclude the crowns from seeking adult penalties in other cases as well where they think it's appropriate. But this requires them to make a statement, address the court about what their proposal is.

Justice committee  The bill proposes three changes in definition. One is the “serious violent offence”. The specific offences that would constitute a serious violent offence are actually articulated in the bill. The next is an expanded definition of “violent offence”. The third is the “serious offence” definition, which has application in the pretrial detention provisions.

Justice committee  Five years or more would be defined as a serious offence.

Justice committee  I think the minister may have spoken to that. We understand that there will be pressures. We expect that the provinces will be looking to assess what the impact of these provisions will be on their costs. There are also some offsetting provisions--for example, the pretrial detention provisions--because they only apply to serious offences.

Justice committee  Yes. These are largely administration of justice and corrections costs. They are borne by the provinces. The federal government has funding arrangements with all the provinces and territories. They also contribute to the overall costs. Those agreements are currently in place, and there are always discussions about the appropriate share of provincial and federal contributions to those.

Justice committee  I was just going to say that you have raised a very significant problem that hurts accessibility to the justice system for a lot of people, and there are lots of things that can be done to speed things along. For example, the federal Department of Justice has issued guidelines for reasonable child support, which has led to easier and faster solutions in a lot of areas where these areas would be hotly contested before.

Justice committee  There is a significant difference in terms of both underlying philosophy and approach. In a usual criminal court, someone is being held accountable for their wrongdoing in a manner that's proportionate to the seriousness of the offence. With people who are addicted, there's an understanding that this type of approach doesn't actually work to discourage them from subsequent criminal activity.

Justice committee  I believe the supplementary estimates have been approved and they're just now moving them out. So I don't think there's any doubt that those resources will be flowing in December.

Justice committee  I think you may also be talking about court-appointed counsel, and oftentimes, if the defendant does not have legal aid, the case cannot proceed and you can't get a conviction against the person. In that case, the judge will sometimes order one level of government or another to pay the costs of legal aid or the legal defence of that person.

Justice committee  Were you asking whether or not the judges are participating in the actual evaluation?

Justice committee  There's a different requirement for accountability if it's a grant and contribution agreement, which is what the drug courts are under. So the accountability of the Law Commission is a different model. We would not necessarily be evaluating the reports that come out of the Law Commission.

Justice committee  That would depend on the evaluation model the various groups have determined. Normally you would--

Justice committee  I don't believe there is, is there?

Justice committee  As you probably know, the Law Commission was a product of a federal statute and they gave annual reports to Parliament.