44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 9, 2022 10:00AM
Madam Speaker, I think my hon. colleague is in a different time zone than I am. I am on Newfoundland time, which is an hour and a half behind.
The red flag clause in the bill is a great clause, and I agree with the member.
46 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for London North Centre.
It is my pleasure to speak on the laudable justice of Bill C-21, an act to amend certain acts and to make certain consequential amendments to firearms. The government has taken a multi-faceted approach to address firearms violence in Canada. Our ban on assault-style firearms on May 1, 2020 was a significant step forward in implementing a number of firearm policy commitments that were made in the Speech from the Throne in both 2019 and 2020. Bill C-21 builds on these commitments and other initiatives by addressing a multitude of factors that contribute to gun violence.
I want to start by addressing an issue that has been brought up so many times here today, the issue of illegal versus legal guns. I want to make it clear that the government is not targeting legal gun ownership; it is about creating safer communities for all Canadians.
As many of us have acknowledged here, and we have heard that the public safety committee has studied the issue as well, legal guns can turn into illegal guns. Since 2009, we have seen an increase, by three times, in the number of thefts of guns from legal gun owners. Those stolen guns then end up in the hands of criminals.
Also, statistics show that the more gun ownership we have, the more accidental shootings and deaths there are, accidents that are lethal or non-lethal. The stats show that Saskatchewan has the highest rates in the country of accidental shootings, next to Manitoba and then Alberta, followed by B.C. and then Ontario. I believe Quebec is one of the lower ones compared to the national average. That is something that could be decreased through this legislation.
As I mentioned a few minutes ago, there have been other countries that have addressed their gun violence with similar pieces of legislation, with similar reforms. We have seen, for example, that in Australia the rate of gun-related deaths fell by about 50%, and that number stayed there. That is remarkable. We have seen similar outcomes in the U.K. and New Zealand as well. That is really important to acknowledge.
Today, we have discussed where these guns are sourced from, and I appreciated the hon. opposition member's research into this, but I have also talked to many chiefs of police about the issue and I also used to sit on the public safety committee. There is a common understanding that over half of crime guns traced in 2020 were sourced domestically. They were either obtained legally or through theft and straw purchases, including 50% of handguns that were traced. For example, the shooting on the Danforth was with a legal firearm that was stolen from Saskatchewan and ended up being used in that mass killing, which was such an unfortunate incident.
Reducing the number of domestically sourced handguns that are diverted to the illegal market is part of our government's comprehensive plan to mitigate the deadly threat of firearm violence. This is a very important step.
The next thing I would like to address, which I know is a big concern for many members in the House, is the issue of gun smuggling. Reducing it is a key part of the government's fight to reduce access to illegal firearms. Firearms smuggling and trafficking are very often associated with organized crime activity and jeopardize public safety. Access to illegal guns enables the commission of other crimes, including drug trafficking. We must and will continue to take steps to address this, including by increasing the maximum penalties from 10 to 14 years of imprisonment for gun smuggling and trafficking.
According to a 2018 report from Toronto police's firearms enforcement unit, 70% of Toronto's crime guns for which sourcing could be determined came from across the border, compared with the 50% average between 2014 and 2017. That is why this step is so essential. Toronto police attributed the increase in foreign sourcing in 2018 to two large seizures by the guns and gangs unit. This has had a major impact on communities and provinces, which have called on the federal government to combat trafficking and smuggling.
Signalling the seriousness of these offences to criminals is of paramount importance in deterring these crimes. The proposal to increase the maximum penalty will also send a clear message to the courts that Parliament denounces these crimes.
Next I want to address Bill C-21's proposed red-flag regime in the Criminal Code, which seeks to prevent serious violence from occurring in the first place.
We want to prevent these incidents from happening by creating a new tool to temporarily remove guns from situations where violence may be possible. The new regime would allow any member of the public to apply to a court for an emergency weapons protection order that would prohibit or limit access by an individual to a weapon for a maximum of 30 days. It could go beyond that, if necessary, up to five years. The regime would also allow judges to hold emergency proceedings in camera or to redact or seal part of the record to protect the identity of the applicant or potential victims, another issue that was raised here today. We want to ensure that people feel safe to come forward.
The person making the application must have reasonable grounds to believe that another individual should not have access to a weapon because they pose a safety risk to themselves or to others. If a judge is satisfied that the grounds are met, they can make a temporary weapons prohibition order for up to 30 days. The removal of a firearm from an individual who poses a risk to themselves or others would provide the necessary time for authorities to undertake a full investigation and hearing. Following this, a determination could be made as to whether a longer-term prohibition is warranted.
This bill would also allow a member of the public to apply to a judge on similar grounds to seek a temporary limitation on access order of up to 30 days to prevent a person who is subject to a weapons prohibition from accessing firearms in the possession of another person. The order would be against the third person, who could be an acquaintance or a roommate.
Bill C-21 also proposes to address a gap in the law concerning replica firearms. These changes have been the subject of much attention since the introduction of the bill, so I would like to spend some time describing exactly what the bill proposes on this point.
The current definition of replica firearms, which has been in the Criminal Code since 1998, has two requirements: a device that exactly resembles, or resembles with near precision, a firearm, and that is not a firearm itself. Replica firearms are prohibited devices in Canada. Replica firearms are also considered imitation firearms, and the Criminal Code makes it an offence to use an imitation firearm in the commission of another offence.
Replica firearms are treated the way they are in our Criminal Code because the public and police are not able to distinguish them from conventional firearms, particularly in time-sensitive emergency situations. Sadly, we saw this recently in Scarborough. This is a very important part of what the bill is trying to address.
Many Canadians understand exactly the gap that is being targeted. It is quite simply this: a device that fires at a velocity of approximately 500 feet per second. That is addressed in this bill.
Finally, I will conclude by saying that through all the provisions in this bill, there would be a huge reduction in the number of firearms in Canada. I agree that we need to address this from several different angles, but the mere reduction that we will see once this bill is passed will have a significant impact, as we have seen in many other countries.
1338 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, in comments earlier, the hon. member across the way made it clear in her comments that the desire is to remove guns from our streets and have fewer guns in circulation. There are parts of Bill C-21 I agree with and my caucus agrees with, and we made the good-faith offer to split this bill, address those areas, get them through committee and get them enacted into law.
Why did the government reject that offer?
79 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I think it is so important for us to make sure we get the majority of this legislation through this House and the other place. In particular, the freeze on handguns is essential. That freeze on handguns is one that the opposition is not in favour of, and as I have said previously, they are not in favour of our ban on assault rifles. In fact, they want to make sure that they can bring assault rifles back. We have seen that position in their previous platform, and many times when we have put forward legislation or proposals to restrict the use of firearms or the ownership of firearms, they have opposed them.
115 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, as this evening's debate draws to a close, our interventions in the House demonstrate that we need to set partisanship aside and work together to move forward on the issue of gun control.
In that regard, I know that the member for Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, who is a member of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, will work very hard to improve Bill C-21, including by bringing forward our proposal on handguns.
How does my colleague from Brampton North feel about the other suggestions my party has made? Earlier I mentioned the idea of creating joint task forces to crack down on illegal weapons, and my colleague from Rivière-du-Nord has introduced a bill to create an organized crime registry and expand the definition of organized crime.
It is important to remain open to other ideas and to work together to move this issue forward, setting aside criticism and partisanship.
167 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I think the member is absolutely right. We do need to work together, and our government has been making strides in this area.
We are working very closely with the Quebec government to reduce gun violence, and the Minister of Public Safety recently attended a forum in Montreal to understand the issue better. We have directed $46 million under our guns and gangs fund to the Legault government and we are finalizing a transfer specifically for Quebec under our building safer communities fund to prevent gun crime.
I absolutely agree that we need to work together to address this issue, and that is exactly what we are doing.
110 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the member mentioned other countries and jurisdictions in her speech, and it made me think of the United States, which seems to be awash in handguns and guns of all kinds. We have not reached that point yet. It is a fact that when we go to the United States, we are not sure if the person sitting next to us on the bus has a gun. We are not at that point in Canada.
Would the member say this legislation is part of an approach to make sure we never reach that tipping point here in Canada?
100 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, absolutely I believe in action, and what has been happening in the U.S.A. is very unfortunate. Many have called upon the government to act after a lot of mass casualties. We have seen so many, and just recently once again at an elementary school. It is heartbreaking, and I hope their government is able to pass legislation. I know they have recently passed it in the House of Representatives in Congress, but I hope the Senate will take this issue seriously and listen to all of those who have suffered from gun violence.
97 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order.
In reference to the last Liberal speaker, I just want to point out and clarify that in the House she referred to assault rifles—
34 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/9/22 11:44:03 p.m.
- Watch
That is a point of debate and not a point of order.
Resuming debate, the hon. parliamentary secretary.
18 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is almost midnight, and I see there are still a number of members of Parliament in the House and a number of us who have participated in tonight's debate, which is no surprise. This is an issue of fundamental importance, and we—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
52 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/9/22 11:44:31 p.m.
- Watch
I do not think the parliamentary secretary pinpointed exactly who is in the House and who is not in the House, but I do want to remind members to perhaps stick to their speeches, as opposed to the surroundings of the House of Commons.
The hon. parliamentary secretary.
48 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it was a compliment to the House. I am not sure where that came from. I always get along with my colleague on committee.
In any case, the point is that it is nearly midnight, and we are here debating an issue of such fundamental importance. The starting point for me begins with that fundamental truth, that the role and responsibility of any democratically elected government is to ensure the security and the safety of citizens.
Bill C-21 takes its cue from that. It is about confronting gun violence in Canada through enacting preventative measures that limit future violence. In the limited time that I have to speak on the bill tonight, I want to focus on two key aspects of the bill and then relate those to measures already enacted by the government, which I think highly complement what Bill C-21 offers.
Let us begin with a fact, a very clear fact about violent crime. We know that handguns are the weapon of choice for criminals. For example, in 2020, handguns were used in 75% of armed robberies and in 54% of sexual offences. Those are only two examples, and if I had more time, I could elaborate on those.
Recognizing this, under Bill C-21, if the proposed law goes ahead, the buying, the selling, the transferring or the importing of handguns would no longer be legal. That is an advancement in our society that is generational in terms of its importance.
We saw, a few days ago, a press conference where the Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Safety spoke, but behind them were advocates, many of whom have experienced this in a deeply personal way. Their families have been torn apart by gun violence, completely torn apart, so their perspective informs this bill because the government took the opportunity to engage with them throughout to ensure that their point of view was represented. What I just read, with regard to this freeze of handguns, the freeze on selling, transferring, buying and importing, is reflective of their advice to the government through the consultations that took place. It ultimately means that the market for handguns will be capped.
The measure would see the number of handguns in Canada go down. As we just heard from our colleague from Brampton North, the reality is that, when there are fewer handguns in circulation, it means that society is safer. We will see fewer suicides, fewer homicides and fewer injuries caused by firearms, specifically handguns.
What about lawful gun owners? I think it is a very relevant issue. I know my Conservative colleagues have brought that up. What are the consequences for lawful gun owners under the bill?
Canadians who have a registered handgun, for target shooting, for example, could still use it. I emphasize that. I also emphasize that hunters are not the focus. Hunting is a Canadian tradition. People practice it, particularly in rural communities, but I have a number of constituents in my community of London, an urban area, who hunt. This bill would not apply to them, nor does it apply to sport shooters.
In case there is any confusion, and I know that if there is confusion, it is on the Conservative side, let me just reassure Conservative colleagues that Bill C-21 is not about hunters. It is not about sport shooters. It is not about those who currently own a handgun and target shoot, for example.
Instead, criminals are the focus—
584 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/9/22 11:48:54 p.m.
- Watch
The hon. member for North Okanagan—Shuswap is rising on a point of order.
15 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the member is misleading the House when he says that this does not affect sport shooters. He obviously—
21 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/9/22 11:49:05 p.m.
- Watch
That is a point of debate. The hon. member can raise that during questions and comments.
The hon. parliamentary secretary.
20 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I was just going to offer that to my hon. colleague. If he wishes, we can discuss it, but it is clear, in my view, that sport shooting is not impacted.
Another key aspect of Bill C-21 is the maximum penalty offences such as smuggling and trafficking would go up from 10 years to 14 years of imprisonment. That is an advance of great importance. It is something we have not seen before and is something I know many in the law enforcement community, as well as advocates, have been calling for. From a deterrence perspective, this matters. Taken together with what I just mentioned regarding the freeze on handguns, it complements very much what the government has already done.
I remind the House of those measures, fundamental measures, including the ban placed on no less than 1,500 models of assault-style weapons, including the AR-15. These are weapons designed to kill. One does not need an AR-15, for example, to go deer hunting.
Hunting, as I said before, is a fundamental Canadian tradition. I do not dispute that at all. I have hunted. The reality is that when we have assault weapons in our society, our society, by definition, is less safe. The only real voices championing the view that assault weapons have a place in Canadian society are the gun lobby, who found their way to make a real point to certain Conservative MPs. We saw what happened in the last election, where there was great confusion about the particular point of view on that issue in the Conservative platform, but I digress.
Providing more funding to law enforcement to tackle crime and gun trafficking in particular is something this government has carried out, as well as restoring funding that was cut under the previous government to the RCMP and to the CBSA so they can carry out that fundamental work at our borders. I do not dispute for a moment the important point colleagues have raised here tonight that what happens at the border is of great importance with respect to the issue of gun violence. There is no doubt about that at all.
We need law enforcement to continue its work. We need it to do more and we need to equip its members with the resources so they can carry out all of those responsibilities. This government has allowed them to do that by providing more resources. Of course, there is always more we can do.
I also see in this bill the enacting of wire taps that would be used in investigations relating to gun trafficking would be made easier. That is something that deserves emphasis as well.
Finally, with my remaining time, let me look at another aspect of great importance, which is the $250-million fund announced by the government to deal with gang violence and its root causes. I understand under the bill that access to that funding by local non-profit organizations would be expedited such that in my own community of London, Ontario, for example, local organizations focusing on the root causes of violence and specifically violence that leads to crime, including gang violence, would be able to apply through their municipality, and ultimately to the federal government, for funding to deal with youth intervention programs.
As we know, early intervention is so vital to ensuring young people have the equality of opportunity such that they have a stream toward a more promising future. Other examples could be dealing with the causes of intergenerational poverty. We know there is a connection between gun violence, gang participation and intergenerational poverty.
Fortunately, London has not been struck by a great deal of gang activity, but I know there are other communities throughout the country where gang activity is a real challenge. This fund, and ensuring that organizations have access to it in a very timely way, is important. I understand there will be an effort to move forward with funding in the coming months so organizations can apply and get access. This speaks to the importance of youth.
The perspectives of this bill make youth front and centre and ensure they are a major focus. I commend the government for putting forward a bill that does not ignore youth, because I do not think we could have meaningful legislation dealing with guns and ignore youth. From a preventive perspective, it is quite critical.
738 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the member opposite talked about how the bill would not affect the sport shooting community, so let us engage in a quick hypothetical.
Young children today observe their favourite Olympic sport shooter on TV and would like to get involved in that sport. With the freeze on the purchase of handguns, which will not affect the overwhelming majority of guns used in crimes because they are not used by law-abiding gun owners but by criminals who use smuggled guns, how would those children, once they become 18, get their PAL and RPAL? How would they get into sport shooting if they are never able to legally and safely acquire a gun for sport shooting?
117 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the member is very good, as usual, at citing hypotheticals, but he has not pointed at all to anything in the bill that would prevent someone from becoming a sport shooter. The critical thing is to take it back and focus on—
45 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
What would they shoot with? They need a gun. Be serious.
11 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
