Justice committee  I would like to conclude by saying, as I mentioned in response to Mr. Dechert's questions, we certainly don't ignore or not acknowledge the problem of organized crime. You have a very difficult task ahead of you here. Somebody is saying, “Fix organized crime. How do we do that?”

Justice committee  To be honest, this is the first time I've heard that particular comment from our mayor. I will respond to some of the things you said before getting to that comment, on the mandatory minimum issue. I don't disagree with much of what you've said. Sentences should be proportional

Justice committee  I certainly agree that there should not be guns on the streets of Toronto. I certainly agree with measures being taken to suppress that type of activity. The specific suggestion I think you're referring to is the idea.... Could you say it again, actually? It was no bail for peopl

Justice committee  To be honest, it doesn't sound like a completely unreasonable suggestion. The objection I can see to that is the absolutism, again. An absolutism in legislation is always a problem for us. If an approach of that nature is taken, if there can be something created where there will

Justice committee  But maybe he was wrong as well, because he was ultimately captured and he was ultimately extradited...it sounds—I'm not familiar with the exact case, but from what you've told me—

Justice committee  I want to be clear that we're not suggesting this committee should recommend that we take a hands-off, nothing to be worried about, approach to organized crime. We acknowledge it's a significant issue and steps need to be taken. They need to be the right steps. I think some of

Justice committee  First, I'm not sure when we started relying on the statements of crime bosses as the word of gold—

Justice committee  This may have been the perception of this particular crime figure. I'm not sure if that comports with the perception of academics and social scientists who have studied the issue. I don't think that—

Justice committee  Maybe he knew something the social scientists didn't, but—

Justice committee  From the cases I've looked at, there's not a tremendous amount of jurisprudence on the issue, so you might not be the only one who's still trying to figure it out. You're correct that suspicion is certainly a lower standard than belief. As for how that standard differs, it's no

Justice committee  I think it's Kang-Brown. There were two companion cases that dealt with drug dog sniff searches. One was A.M. and one was Kang-Brown. It's in one of those cases; there is a brief paragraph on the distinction between the two. Belief is a higher standard. It requires more in term

Justice committee  We've seen some bad experiences with lists in general. The listing of terrorist organizations seems to be a little more contained than the listing of criminal organizations might be. Some of the evidence this committee has heard from past witnesses talks about 900 criminal organi

Justice committee  Yes.

Justice committee  Perhaps I can clarify this. Some of the sentiments I would express are similar to those that Mr. Trudell suggested earlier. We don't take issue, necessarily, with Parliament setting guidelines for things. What we do take issue with is absolutism and Parliament doing that. And we

Justice committee  In terms of the first question on lawful access legislation, I think what you're hitting on is the idea of having ISPs built into their infrastructure, the ability to capture and retain certain information.