44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 16, 2023 10:00AM
Madam Speaker, I wonder if the hon. member could comment on the fact that firearms-related incidents in northern Saskatchewan went up by 75% from 2017 to 2021, or the fact that the shooting in The Danforth in Toronto was done with a gun that was stolen in Saskatchewan.
I guess it really comes down to a fundamental question: Who on earth, in this country, other than police or the military, needs a handgun?
74 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, most of these, if not all, are illegal firearms in northern Saskatchewan. We know that. A lot of the “tough on crime” that the Liberals have not done over the last eight years is now paying massive dividends in northern Saskatchewan, as the member talked about.
We are in trouble in northern Saskatchewan for a very good reason. It is because they are not tough on crime. We have seen many people, day in, day out, go into court who should be sentenced and are not. They get out and do the same tactics they did a week before, and this is part of the problem we have right now in northern Saskatchewan.
117 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his speech. He does a very effective job as vice-chair at the Canadian heritage committee, and often chairs our meetings. I appreciate his work. However, there are some things that need to be corrected from his speech.
First is the fact that there are no guns being removed as a result of Bill C-21. He knows that. Both the G-4 and G-46 amendments, because of NDP pressure, were withdrawn. That is fact number one.
Fact number two is that the emphasis of Bill C-21 is on ghost guns. Ghost guns have been a scourge of many parts of this country, with a tenfold increase in the lower mainland of British Columbia. This is something that law enforcement needs additional powers to combat. These are criminal gangs and criminals who are using these untraceable firearms. That is the focus of the bill, and that is something that he should be in favour of.
Third, he did mention sport shooters. This morning, I was surprised to see the Conservatives table an amendment to remove an exemption for sport shooters who are in the Olympics or the Paralympics. That is an exemption that we believe in because the NDP did table the amendment.
On the International Practical Shooting Confederation, we believe—
221 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/16/23 11:48:21 p.m.
- Watch
We have a point of order.
The hon. member for Edmonton—Wetaskiwin.
13 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the hon. member knows that it is against the rules of the House to mislead the House. The hon. member knows that he was approached by a hard-working, Conservative staff member, who asked him personally to understand that there was an administrative error made—
48 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/16/23 11:48:44 p.m.
- Watch
That is debate.
Order. The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby and the hon. member for Edmonton—Wetaskiwin know these are points of debate, and it is not proper to be debating while I have the floor.
I would ask the hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby to finish up.
53 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, why did Conservatives table this motion to remove the exemption—
An hon. member: Oh, oh!
18 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/16/23 11:49:30 p.m.
- Watch
I would ask the hon. member for Edmonton—Wetaskiwin to not speak while someone else has the floor. If he continues, he can either leave the chamber or be asked to leave.
The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.
41 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the Conservatives have tabled this as Motion No. 12. It removes the exemption for sport shooters, for Olympic and Paralympic competitions. Conservatives have filed this. Why did they file this?
32 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, let me talk about ghost guns after three hours in the House. The respected member for Kootenay—Columbia, who is a former RCMP officer of over 30 years, brought it up to the government over two and a half years ago. It did nothing at that time.
Then the member for Kootenay—Columbia asked a very important question: Where is the education in this law? Where is the education? I have to thank the Saskatoon Wildlife Federation for all the great work it does. With this bill, the federal government has done nothing on the education process going forward on Bill C-21. It should be ashamed.
111 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, there are a lot of issues that come with this type of debate. I appreciate my colleague talking about the reality in urban Saskatchewan versus rural Saskatchewan. Does he want to elaborate?
34 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, believe it or not, even though I am an urban MP, I get a lot of calls. In my province, people want to be outdoors. They want to shoot guns and sport shoot. I have to thank the Wildlife Federation that does a wonderful job in my community.
The one thing I will say is that I am so proud of Bob Freberg and the Province of Saskatchewan. They are still owed $9 million by the federal government because it has not paid for the officer or the office.
91 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is with a heavy heart that I join this debate. I am going to speak for a bit and then I will take some questions because I have some answers I would like to give to a few of the questions that were asked in the chamber this evening. I hope members will stay and have the courage to ask me the same questions they asked other members.
I am really standing up for the law-abiding firearms owners in Saskatchewan this evening, because despite what the junior coalition partner NDP and the Liberals say, we all know that the two amendments that were brought forward with members kicking and screaming were about, with one, trying to create a backdoor registry and, with the second, a minimal change to the definition, which really did not affect the legislation at all.
When we talked about amendments, several times this evening my colleagues tried to put forward a unanimous motion to change an amendment that had a clerical error. Years ago, this would not have happened. Years ago, under Tom Mulcair or Jack Layton, they would have been honoured to accept that unanimous consent motion and it would have been changed because it was simply a clerical error. Time and time again, the House leader stood and mischaracterized what happened, which is a sore spot for Conservatives because we do like to try to work together in this House. What we have seen tonight was complete disrespect for how this chamber is supposed to work.
I will go back to standing up for law-abiding firearms owners across Saskatchewan. Regina—Lewvan is an urban riding that has sport shooters, hunters, people who go to the range to trap-shoot and the Regina Wildlife Federation, good, salt-of-the-earth people who just want to keep their traditions alive. Earlier on in this debate about law-abiding firearms owners, we learned that it really was not about decreasing crime. It was really about going after something that people do not understand.
I have some quotes by people who are are not traditional Conservatives. One is from Chief Heather Bear from the Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations. Chief Heather Bear stated:
When guns are confiscated from sustenance hunters, it impacts them and their families when they have merely been trying to put food on the table. When guns are confiscated it may also impact the whole nation, especially those who hunt for ceremonial purposes, in that sometimes we only need traditional food for ceremonies....
If there are no safety issues and there is no issue of domestic violence or any kind of violence, then taking away a gun impacts our nations and our citizens' ability to assert our inherent, and treaty and constitutional rights. We also view our guns as a tool of our first nations sustenance hunters.
That is not a traditional Conservative supporter. I would also say that I do not think she would be a conspiracy theorist. I think she has some genuine concern about what is going to happen with their traditional way of life and how they will feed their families. I dare any member in this House to stand and say that is fearmongering, as has been said so often tonight about Conservatives who have brought forward concerns from their constituents.
We all represent our constituents and it is being boiled down by some in the NDP who are terrified by this debate right now because they know they are going to lose seats in rural Canada due to being on the wrong side of history on this. We need to remember when Liberals, in the 1990s, brought in the long gun registry. I remember that they were going to drop crime and crime statistics were going to plummet because they were going to take long guns away from our hunters and farmers. This is just rinse and repeat.
We see right now that violent crime has gone up 32% in our country, with the Liberals doing nothing with their hug-a-thug policies. We are seeing gang violence increase by over 90%. Do we think this legislation is going to prevent that?
I have my PAL. I know how long it took to get my possession and acquisition licence. I know that every morning my name goes through CPIC, and the Liberals and NDP are trying to take advantage of people who do not know what the regulations are around this. Every morning my name goes through CPIC, like every other person who has a PAL, to make sure they have not done anything wrong. If they go through, police officers know that people have firearms in their possession because of RPAL and that there could be dangerous situations, which does not happen with law-abiding firearms owners.
Robert Freberg came and talked to the Saskatchewan caucus. Do members know how many crimes in Saskatchewan have been committed with a legally owned firearm? Fewer than a handful, he said. If people in this chamber think voting for the bill is going to drop crime rates in our country, either they are lying to themselves or they do not understand what the bill would actually do.
We know that with the so-called NDP standing up for these amendments, there is going to be a firearms advisory committee. This committee is going to then use it as a back door to bring through more legislation and take guns away from law-abiding hunters and farmers.
I just got off the phone with the Agribition CEO, Kim Hextall. She asked why they would want to take away firearms from people who use them for protecting their livestock and for varmints. These are the people none of these members in this chamber are standing up for, and I think it is something that should be taken very seriously. If they are going to take gun crime seriously and try to get gang members to not have illegal firearms, perhaps they should not have voted in favour of Bill C-5, which lessened the penalties for all these crimes.
1022 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I would like to read from a news article: “The final report of the Mass Casualty Commission (MCC) investigating the April 2020 mass shooting in Nova Scotia that left 22 people dead makes several recommendations to meaningfully change Canada's gun laws.” The headline reads, “MCC report calls for stricter gun laws”.
Is there any situation in which the Conservative Party would support stricter gun laws?
72 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, there absolutely is.
The Prime Minister said on December 19, 2022, that “there are some guns, yes, that we're going to have to take away from people who were using them to hunt.”
38 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
It being 11:59 p.m., pursuant to order made Tuesday, May 9, it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the report stage of the bill now before the House.
The question is on Motion No. 1. A vote on this motion also applies to Motion Nos. 2 to 6, 9 and 12.
If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division or wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
105 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/17/23 12:00:05 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we request a recorded vote.
7 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
The recorded division on the motion stands deferred.
The question is on Motion No. 10. A vote on this motion also applies to Motion No. 11. If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division or wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
66 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/17/23 12:01:09 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, again, I would request a recorded vote.
9 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
The recorded division on the motion stands deferred. The recorded division will also apply to Motion No. 11.
The question is on Motion No. 13.
If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division or wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
65 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
