Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to debate the third group of amendments regarding Bill C-68, an act respecting firearms and other weapons. I also want to thank my hon. friend from Carleton-Charlotte for seconding the amendments I have put forth. Within this block I have moved four motions for debate today, Motions Nos. 4, 76, 92 and 154.
Judging by the level of debate in this House, in the media and among Canadians generally, this legislation undoubtedly is one of the most important bills presently before the House. I am honoured therefore to rise today to speak on this motion on behalf of my constituents of Annapolis Valley-Hants.
Over the past year I have consulted widely with people in my constituency. Whether at public rallies, through regular correspondence or during many conversations with concerned individuals, I have maintained a regular contact with over 1,500 people on the firearms issue alone. The series of amendments I have brought forward represents the culmination of this consultation process. The amendments represent the views I have heard from many of my constituents. I feel that if adopted they will make the bill stronger and more acceptable to a large majority of firearms owners.
Before outlining the details of these amendments, I want to clearly state that I intend at the end of the day to support Bill C-68. I believe the majority of the provisions in this bill will achieve our government's stated goal in improving public safety on the streets and in our homes. Certainly I am not alone in this regard. The vast majority of Canadians have expressed support for the crime control elements of Bill C-68. Initiatives including stiffer penalties for illegal importation and trafficking of firearms as well as cracking down heavily on those who use firearms in the commission of crime will indeed improve security on our streets.
In discussions I have had with my constituents, a common theme has consistently emerged. Many individuals have serious concerns with the mandatory registration of all long guns. The motions I have introduced reflect this concern. They are also a reflection of my absolute commitment to represent the views of the people of Annapolis Valley-Hants. I have promised from day one to work to address their problems with this bill and to bring forward realistic solutions in order to mitigate these concerns.
The overall objectives of this series of motions is quite simple. As I proposed in my written submission to the justice committee, I support amending the legislation in order to exempt owners of non-prohibited, non-restricted long guns historically used in Canada for hunting or sport shooting from licensing and registration provisions of Bill C-68. Any new purchases or transfers of existing firearms would be subject to the requirements outlined in the legislation.
This proposal offers a reasonable balance between the rights of legitimate owners and users of firearms and our government's commitment to strong, effective firearms legislation. We have an opportunity to send a positive message to Canadians that we understand historical, cultural and economic attachments that have governed the use of firearms to this point in time. However, we will also be sending an important message that times are changing. In keeping with legitimate public concerns, new generations of firearms owners will be subject to new rules.
Within this series of motions I would like to highlight two which are of particular importance. Motion No. 4 would add new clause 2(1) to the bill. This clause reads:
This act does not apply in respect of
(a) any firearm that is not a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm; or
(b) any ammunition that is not prohibited ammunition.
This motion would allow for an exemption from the licensing and registration components of the bill for current owners of long guns.
By supporting the inclusion of this clause, all members of the House will have a chance to acknowledge the legitimate rights of owners of long guns. It will ensure that these individuals will not be subject to undue burden or costs without weakening the crime control elements of the legislation. It will allow us to gain greater support or at the very least, tacit acceptance of Canada's gun owners. After all, without their acceptance or their willingness to comply with the new laws we may face problems enforcing this legislation.
The second motion I would like to briefly discuss is Motion No. 154. This motion would entail the adding of new clause 110.1 to the legislation. This clause reads:
Notwithstanding section 2.1, the governor in council may make regulations that are applicable in respect of firearms that are not prohibited or restricted firearms for the purpose of
(a) establishing minimum age and safety criteria for purchasers of firearms;
(b) establishing safe storage and handling standards for firearms; and
(c) regulating the exportation and importation of firearms.
This additional clause responds to concerns over the ability to determine whether or not a long gun is owned and operated in a safe and legal manner. It has been included to ensure that officials have the ability to establish and enforce certain standards that must be strictly adhered to in order to legally own a long gun. This is not unlike the present system that uses the FAC.
Through this amendment, the government will have the opportunity to implement through the regulations a means to ensure the safe and legal ownership of long guns. Any regulations would of course have to remain consistent with clause 2.1 which provides for the exemption of long guns from the licensing and registration components of the bill.
I am pleased by the changes made to the bill during the committee hearings. These changes do reflect many concerns which have been brought forward by legitimate gun owners. I would also like to applaud my hon. colleagues who have worked so diligently on this legislation.
I would now ask my colleagues, as well as the Minister of Justice, to support the measures I have brought forward for debate today. While we have certainly come a long way in our deliberations, I believe we must go further still.
These motions represent a modified course of action, a course that will in my opinion help gain the support of many firearms owners. By adopting this series of motions, I believe we will still achieve the overall intent of the legislation without adding to the overall bureaucracy or cost. Above all, we will develop a bill that addresses the concerns of all people on all sides of this issue.