Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to participate in debate on a Reform amendment to split Bill C-68 and thus bring the real issue of safety and security of Canadians into focus.
The amendment presents the Minister of Justice with a real opportunity to protect Canadians and prosecute and punish those who break the law.
As the bill is currently structured, the legitimate issues concerning firearms control are clouded and confused. This obfuscation was no doubt conceived, cultivated and foisted on the minister by select individuals of the Coalition for Gun Control and some stealthy, arrogant, policy counsels within justice. Like a rock these beacons of virtue and public service are telling Canadians what is good for them. If these same people are so concerned for the welfare and safety of Canadians and fairness in laws, then any rational thinking bureaucrat would have seen this major deficiency in handiwork.
Anyone can see that splitting the bill will focus the wrath where it should be, at those individuals who use firearms in the commission of crimes and who continue to make our streets unsafe for law-abiding citizens.
As Bill C-68 is currently constituted we are being asked to deal with two separate issues. Let us try to remove some of the emotion from the debate. Let us deal with the issues in chewable chunks. If the minister believes so firmly in firearms registration, then let him stand up and debate his notion of fairness. If he is so concerned with criminal justice let him stand up and debate his notion of fairness. Let the issues stand on their own merits and not on stealth.
Recently the Minister of Justice during a speech in Montreal was quoted as saying: "More than anything else Bill C-68 is about the kind of country we want to live in, the kind of society we want as Canadians". He went on: "We are willing to have it out right now. Let's decide who is running this country. There's no room for an American style gun lobby in this country".
I want to tell the justice minister that Canadians run the country and there is room in this nation for all kinds of people representing many points of view. Comments about gun control like the ones he made in Montreal are intolerant. Debate is dissent according to the minister. What is he afraid of? If he really wants, as he said, to have it out, then level the playing field. If he feels he has such support, deal with the legislation in Bill C-68 upfront, each issue at a time without the rhetoric.
Let us take a look at some of the statistics and at the real issue. Last year roughly 3,800 firearms were either lost or stolen by those who lawfully own them in Canada. Some of these would have been from police and from the military. During that same period 375,000 firearms were smuggled into Canada. That is one hundred times as many.
The onus and emphasis of the minister's legislation is registration which impacts on lawful citizens. Why does he not beef up security at our borders and crack down on the gun smugglers and runners?
The minister says he wants to take this issue on. He thinks establishing a national registry at likely cost estimates upwards of $500 million to implement is taking the issue on. Tying up police resources in software programs and registration verification is really getting tough on crime. The criminals are shaking in their boots. One does not have to go two miles from Parliament Hill as recently as last Thursday when three parolees shot it out with police, wounding two officers because of better fire power. I am sure those three, who will be out on release shortly because of our revolving door justice system, will be the first to run out and register their illegal guns. If anyone is playing politics with emotions, it is not the Reform Party on this issue.
The minister conveniently uses the Canadian Association of Police Chiefs to make and carry his message on gun control. This is the same organization that receives federal funding and which has never done any polling of its members. How weak.
I can make a case for the other side based on my conversations with real police officers who are fighting crime. It is backed up by letters and calls. I even received one petition from Sault Ste. Marie with 5,000 signatures, demanding that their point of view be heard. These are responsible, law-abiding citizens who may not meet the minister's social standards and are thus dismissed as not worthy of a point of view.
The whole issue of registration is a red herring in my books. New Zealand has had universal registration and is abandoning it with the blessing of the police because it is time consuming, expensive and is not accomplishing anything.
Australia is considering abandoning its universal registration with the blessing of police. Police in Australia estimate that only one firearm in four is registered due to non-compliance. Criminals for sure do not register their firearms. For heaven's sake, they do not even register their cars.
The shootout in west end Ottawa last Thursday night involved a stolen getaway vehicle. The answer to all this is Bill C-68, an issue the minister says he wants to take on.
A national firearms registry does not meet the views of the majority of Canadians who are seeking less government, less intrusion into their lives, and reducing the cost of government.
The legislation and the minister's bill will impose a 10-year jail term for failure to register firearms and includes the right to search and seize without a warrant. This is the minister's view of how Canadian should be governed, by a police state. After everything is said and done, the criminals will be running the justice system.
Bill C-68 is a complicated, convoluted attempt to shift the focus of the real debate. If it is left in its current form we will fail to tackle the real issue, which of course is crime control. This is bad law. The justice department argues that registration will make gun owners more accountable.
As a firearms owner, I already store my firearms according to the rules, as do the majority of gun owners. I can tell the minister that no registration system will force gun smugglers, gun runners and criminals to be more accountable. It is misguided and focused on the wrong premise.
This is the easy thing to do and the way one would expect a bureaucrat to deal with an issue. In their perfect, self-contained world, any gun owner is a criminal. We are all lumped in the same category. It is convenient, easy but dead wrong. This is bad law.
I therefore support the motion to split Bill C-68 and get down to the business of solving crime.
