Thank you.
I have just some further comments to Mr. Easter's concern. When we think back to the testimony that we heard from the witnesses and also the purpose of the bill, the biggest concern was for someone who had been declined or refused, or for whatever reason, the decision had been made by the Parole Board of Canada that, no, they should not have one, that the very next day potentially the institution has a warden who can actually turn around and authorize an ETA without any involvement from the particular victim or the victim's family, so that was the concern.
The amendment we put forward by the government actually speaks directly to that because in that last three-year period, when day parole eligibility begins, the Parole Board is the deciding factor, the deciding entity, that will determine whether an ETA is approved, and it has to be successful. If it's not successful it will not go back to the institution warden the next time. It will still remain with the Parole Board of Canada, so the point we have to make clear is that it enables the Parole Board to continue to be the deciding factor until a successful ETA has occurred, at which point it goes to Correctional Service Canada. The institution had to determine that. Now, should something be cancelled or there's a problem with that ETA, it will revert back to the Parole Board of Canada.
This amendment speaks directly to what those witnesses were asking for and the purpose of this entire bill.