Foreign Affairs Committee on June 20th, 2006

[Peter Goldring, Conservative, Edmonton East, AB]

When Canadian sportsmen want to buy new shotguns or deer rifles--those, of course, are imported from other countries--does this not apply to other countries that are shipping these sports weapons into Canada?

[Mark Fried]

I'm quite certain that any global principles that are adopted would allow sportsmen to obtain whatever rifles they wished.

[Peter Goldring, Conservative, Edmonton East, AB]

As well, Oxfam was involved in the Haiti interim cooperation framework. This was done several years ago, in 2004. At that time it identified the disarmament and collection of what looked like 25,000 weapons to be collected and destroyed. Do you have any idea how many of those were actually collected and destroyed? What is your opinion on the progress of that?

[Mark Fried]

We'll have to get that information for you.

[Peter Goldring, Conservative, Edmonton East, AB]

Can we assume not very many?

[Mark Fried]

Do you know?

[Lina Holguin]

I don't have the answer to that.

[Peter Goldring, Conservative, Edmonton East, AB]

Are you aware of the estimate as to how many rifles and assault weapons there are in Haiti? Do you have some kind of estimate for other parts of the world?

[Mark Fried]

There are lots of them. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but certainly there are plenty of weapons.

[Peter Goldring, Conservative, Edmonton East, AB]

If you're going into the same numbers you were before, which is about one weapon for ten people, that would seem to suggest there are 800,000 there, and removing 5,000 would really be a drop in the bucket, wouldn't it?

[Lina Holguin]

We published our report in January specifically on Haiti and the presence of arms there. Unfortunately, I can't remember the numbers from that report, but we can certainly send you the report we produced on Haiti.

[Peter Goldring, Conservative, Edmonton East, AB]

If the number is that high, producing a report here with a goal of removing only 25,000 would hardly have any effect on the situation at all.

[Hilary Homes]

It is a challenge to start to do disarmament and gathering, particularly in a context like that, where capacity is a question.

I would remind people, in the context of the land mine campaign that was mentioned earlier, the scale of land mines within the world meant that it was going to take a period of time to start to eradicate them. Initially, there were particular targets set to demonstrate there was political will in the building of capacity.

I think when we look at it in a context like Haiti, it isn't going to happen overnight, but it's important to have those benchmarks. We could say progress is finally being made, in that capacity and political will is finally there. It's going to start with a small amount, and that's a particularly challenging national context.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Mr. Fried.

[Mark Fried]

I think it's important not to be overwhelmed by the numbers and the size of the problem. We're not going to fix this problem at this UN conference, but we have a unique opportunity to make some progress, to begin to set some standards that can then be carried forward. I think it gives us a step forward that we can carry forward and begin to tackle this. It's an overwhelming problem, but we have to move forward, and here we have a unique opportunity.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you.

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

If I may, Mr. Chair, I think you're running into a problem that this committee has for some time been studying Haiti and we've heard evidence that one of the biggest problems they're encountering there is the question of order and arms in places like Cité Soleil. According to the police we've heard from, very little progress has been made on disarming. That's why there's some frustration here, and you just happened to run into that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Unfortunately, our time is out on that.

Madam Guarnieri.

[Albina Guarnieri, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Senator Dallaire has written that no one should live in fear of armed violence, yet guns and small weapons are readily available in country after country. Simply put, the arms trade is out of control, fuelling conflict, poverty, and human rights abuses worldwide. His view is that we have to do something to help change that, which certainly highlights some of the frustration the committee feels. That is the reason why Senator Dallaire has lent his support to Oxfam, Amnesty, and Ploughshares in their certainly commendable efforts.

In Canada, we have spent something close to $1 billion on gun control, yet very little has been spent on controlling the flow of arms to developing countries, where thousands are killed.

You talk about standards, regulations, export permits. Can you give us some idea of what specific things you think Canada should undertake in order to stem the tide of arms and the volume of tragedy they cause?

[Ken Epps]

There are some specific changes we would like to see in Canadian export controls, and I made some reference to those. I think it would serve Canada well, not only for making sure it isn't contributing to the problem, but also for setting a standard for others. We look to Canada to do that, as it has done with the land mines issue.

There is also quite a range of areas within the UN program of action that could help with this. In particular is the whole issue of international assistance and cooperation, which many developing nations are calling for. They're saying “We have a problem. We know it's there. We want to try to deal with the weapons that are circulating in our region or our country, but we just don't have the resources to deal with it. We need assistance.”

That's also where Canada could contribute. It could contribute directly through its own programs of assistance, but also through multilateral programs and institutions like the World Bank, and so on, where it has some influence.

[Albina Guarnieri, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Our research notes say that in March 2006 you wrote, “In the international arena Canada has been an exemplary and consistent advocate...”. Then you went on to say, “In its own house, however, Canada has been less than thorough...”.

Where are our failings, and what would you want us to look at and address to overcome these failings?

[Ken Epps]

I would just repeat some of the things I said earlier. Canada's export controls need to be tightened up, and I've listed some of the areas in that paper where that could occur. But Canada can also show some leadership on this issue, because it does have a well-deserved reputation for dealing with arms control issues in the international arena. It has the land mines treaty as an example of where it has done some exemplary work. So quite apart from the issue of getting its own house in order in dealing with the export controls, there is also work to be done by becoming an international leader.

[Albina Guarnieri, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Would anyone else like to add to that?

[Lina Holguin]

I just would repeat what all of us have said already, that at the next review conference at the UN Canada should show leadership and ensure that the global principles and transfers are inserted in the final document, and that we finally hear a statement from Canada on an arms trade treaty.

We understand that Canada supports it in principle, but we haven't heard any statement from Canada. We have a specific opportunity at the UN, but the G-8 is also coming. At the last G-8, at Gleneagle, there was talk about an arms trade treaty, so hopefully in July we will have a wonderful month of good news related to dealing with the proliferation of arms.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you.

Just to correct the record, Mr. Epps, you said that this committee passed a motion last week supporting the control or even banning of small arms trade. Were you making reference to this committee?