Public Safety committee  It's a one-pager.

Public Safety committee  I would simply like to say that I brought copies of the board's reports for 2005 and 2006--

Public Safety committee  --and copies of a short article in which I talked about how we got to where we did and in which there are some questions.

Public Safety committee  I have a comment, actually.

Public Safety committee  It is true that the number of times firearms were drawn was much less than the number of times tasers were drawn. Now, there was a previous question about whether we receive a report on the use of firearms. The way we get a report on firearms is that each time a firearm is drawn or used, there is an investigation by the special investigations unit.

Public Safety committee  I believe we are the only ones who have a public reporting requirement. As the staff superintendent mentioned, the use-of-force reporting is required by the province, so all of them would be doing that. I believe our training is double the minimum number of hours of training required.

Public Safety committee  I think the staff superintendent mentioned earlier that how people interpret “assaultive” may differ from place to place. We have a very fairly restrictive definition of what constitutes assaultive. We have had some discussions during coroners' inquests about the difference between assaultive and combative.

Public Safety committee  I think the medical profession is now beginning to question whether excited delirium is indeed a diagnosis. Finally, after a recent coroner's inquest, there is a decision by the coroner to review excited delirium as a condition. So we may see some revisions happening to people's understanding and the use of excited delirium as a category.

Public Safety committee  That is correct.

Public Safety committee  I would, and without commenting on the Vancouver situation, I found it very enlightening to read the report of the RCMP public complaints commissioner, Mr. Kennedy. What he talks about in the report as the things the RCMP needs to put in place are very much the kinds of practices and governance frameworks that we have talked about that we did put in place before we allowed the use of tasers.

Public Safety committee  First of all, the situation you described of somebody driving and getting into an altercation with a police officer is unlikely to happen, for the simple reason that we have restricted the deployment of tasers. In Toronto, members of certain units, called emergency task forces, and front-line supervisors are the only ones who have tasers.

Public Safety committee  I did, and I was disappointed by the dearth of research. When Mr. Smith came to Toronto, he agreed that a lot more research is needed. We don't know enough about the long-term physiological, neurological, or the other psychological effects of taser use, especially for persons with certain conditions.

Public Safety committee  It reminds me of a conversation I had with our chief one day. He said that he does not recommend that, because he doesn't have to be shot by a gun to know what the effect of the gun will be.

Public Safety committee  As a matter of fact, no. The only report we get is a report on the use of tasers, because we specifically asked for that one. It was simply because of the nature of the debate that took place and the recognition of the public concern around the taser. We haven't historically asked for reports on the other use-of-force devices.

Public Safety committee  That is correct. Yes.