Justice committee  Yes, there is, and I can.

Justice committee  Yes.

Justice committee  I really can't comment one way or the other. I don't have any personal information nor have I researched that area.

Justice committee  In my view, first of all, some criminals deserve to be in prison.

Justice committee  And in some cases they deserve to be in prison for the rest of their lives. But once they get to prison, I don't think there's any reasonable way of preventing them from interacting socially with other prisoners. In fact, to prevent interaction at the social level would probably create an even more violent or less-controlled prisoner.

Justice committee  Certainly.

Justice committee  I'll make one quick comment. Most judges that I've met should have as much discretion as they have now; there are a few that shouldn't have any. That's the reality.

Justice committee  It's simply that prisoners in jail, no matter what kind of jail it is, are living in very close proximity. Unless you have them all in solitary confinement, there's no way you can prevent them from socializing--talking, sharing stories. It's through that story sharing, that information sharing, that young people who are less sophisticated in the ways of crime will learn better ways to commit crime from the boasts of the older prisoners.

Justice committee  Obviously this takes some discretion away from the judge. Experience with judges over my career has been varied. Like any other group of people in the community, you have some you agree with very strongly and others you don't agree with so much, in terms of their judgments. However, particularly in small communities they know, judges have very good opportunities to respond to crimes through judgments in ways that would best help the communities.

Justice committee  When I was reviewing some material for my presentation today, I came across one article on interviews with armed robbers in Australia. The robbers told the interviewer they had indeed been aware of the varying penalties associated with carrying a firearm. Interestingly enough, it hadn't had an impact on their behaviour, and they said it wouldn't have an impact on their behaviour in the future.

Justice committee  Chief Superintendent.

Justice committee  The proposed legislation will have a positive impact on crime rates in terms of incapacitation. You're putting more people in jail, and if you're lucky enough to hit the prolific offenders, then the people committing the most crime will be behind bars and not committing crimes while they're there.

Justice committee  It's progressively more serious sentencing, but each time the cycle of sentencing ends, they have to come out and re-victimize someone before they hit the next cycle, the next sentence. So, yes, there will be a positive impact on crime because of the incapacitation, but if you're not dealing with the root causes of that behaviour, then you're going to have that person cycle through and continue to victimize the community when they're not in jail.

Justice committee  It does happen. Adults will use young offenders because young offenders will not be punished as severely as the adults. The issue of deterrence is complex. The deterrent factor primarily is getting caught, not so much the sentence itself. Some research shows that the average person is afraid of being caught by the police, so in fact more police in the community will have a positive impact on the level of crime.

Justice committee  The 3%, in particular the youth gangs, are extremely anti-social. For that reason, and for a number of reasons, they're not going to be positively impacted in their psyches by mandatory sentencing. As I said earlier, time in jail is a rite of passage. The media glorifies what they're doing.