Bill C-21 (Historical)

An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act (non-registration of firearms that are neither prohibited nor restricted)

This enactment amends the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act to repeal the requirement to obtain a registration certificate for firearms that are neither prohibited firearms nor restricted firearms.

Business of the House

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform]

Mr. Speaker, I will be happy to address that in the affirmative in a moment but there is more that we should know about in terms of the business we are doing.

We will continue today with Bill C-42, the quarantine act, Bill C-58, the railway transportation bill and Bill C-21, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act (non-registration of firearms that are neither prohibited nor restricted).

Tonight we have the emergency debate pursuant to Standing Order 52 that the Speaker has determined should proceed.

On Friday we will call Bill C-33, the income tax bill and Bill C-6, the aeronautics bill.

Next week is got the job done week when the House has completed the nation's business for this spring's session. During the got the job done week we will continue and hopefully complete the business from this week, as well as some new legislation and legislation that will be out of committee or the Senate.

The list of bills that are currently on the order paper, in addition to those I have identified for this week that I would like to see completed by the House before the summer recess are: Senate amendments to Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act and the Public Service Employment Act.

There are also the following bills: Bill C-32, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (impaired driving) and to make consequential amendments to other Acts; Bill C-44, An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and Bill C-53, An Act to implement the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (ICSID Convention).

Another bill includes Bill C-54, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act (accountability with respect to loans).

By the end of next week, Canadians expect that the Senate will have completed its consideration of budget Bill C-52 without any amendments so that they can relax for the summer with the knowledge that $4.3 billion in the 2006-07 year end measures will be in play.

If there are amendments, we will have to be here in the House to respond and protect measures that might otherwise be lost, such as a $1.5 billion for the Canada ecotrust for clean air and climate change; $600 million for patient wait times guarantees; $400 million for the Canada infoway; $100 million for the CANARIE project to maintain the research broadband network linking Canadian universities and research hospitals; $200 million for protection of endangered spaces; and much more.

Criminal Code

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the government has not put Bill C-21 back on the legislative agenda. It is not there. When it brings it forward we will be able to discuss it.

The member's question on the issue of the long gun registry was a good one. I have asked a lot of police officers about it. Regarding the operating costs for the gun registry, the economic cost of supporting it, one has to question whether that money would best be used where it is today in the long gun registry or whether it would best be used somewhere else.

I argued against the long gun registry. In fact, I went in front of the justice committee to argue against having it. If it were reintroduced today I would not support it. However, we have it. I have asked police officers should we or should we not get rid of the long gun registry and I have received two answers.

Police officers who work in urban areas say we should keep it because they access it quite frequently. There are thousands of hits on the registry every single day. I have received that answer from that population of police officers.

The other population of police officers to whom I spoke are those who work in rural areas. They say they do not need it. They do not use it. They respond to a situation with the presumption that there are guns in the house. They always do that. The rural police offers say that the registry is not needed.

At the end of the day, I have to say I am in a quandary. The overriding principle as to whether or not I support the abolition of the long gun registry resides in a simple question. What is in the best interests of the police who have to deal with people in a very dangerous situation and what is in the best interests of the Canadian public? It boils down to whether or not the money is best spent doing something else as the hon. member quite rightly said, or since the money has been spent on creating the registry, is it better to have the money there so that the police who are working in an urban area can access the registry? I would not advocating and I am sure that nobody in the House would advocate doing anything that would increase the insecurity and danger to our police officers. At the end of the day, that is the question that we all have to answer.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for his impassioned speech. We are discussing reverse onus on gun crimes. I know that the hon. member did talk a little bit about gun stuff in his speech. I want to thank him for his support and hopefully for his and his entire party's support when it comes time to pass Bill C-35.

I noticed that in his speech he went through the life cycle of a law-abiding citizen acquiring a firearm. A law-abiding citizen would apply for a firearms acquisition certificate, or the possession only, or possession and acquisition licence, go through the waiting period, go through all the criminal checks, dot all the is, cross all the ts and then have to fill out a registration form to purchase a firearm. He said very clearly that these are not the people that we want to go after.

I have a simple question for my hon. colleague. If it makes so much sense to support Bill C-35, which is to put the reverse onus on people who commit dangerous offences, whether their motivation is through drug trafficking or anything else, would it not make more sense to use those resources that we are currently spending on the gun registry, which is Bill C-21? It sounded to me he was making an excellent case for passing Bill C-21 and getting rid of the long gun registry and taking the resources from that and using it for implementing Bill C-35 and some of the other programs that the hon. member thinks are so important for the social well-being of members of his community.

I am just wondering if I could count on his support for Bill C-21 as much as I could count on his support for Bill C-35.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Do you have any plans on bringing Bill C-21 forward so that we can have a vote in the House to deal with this issue, as opposed to unilaterally making these decisions?

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's new government is committed to effective gun control. As the Prime Minister has said, “We want to make sure that what we do is actually effective”. That is why the government has proposed in Bill C-21 the repeal of Canada's costly and ineffective long gun registry.

The Minister of Public Safety has been very clear. The government will maintain registration of restricted and prohibited firearms, including all handguns and automatic firearms. However, non-restricted firearms, generally ordinary rifles and shotguns, will be removed from the registry if Bill C-21 passes.

The hon. member suggests that police speak with one voice in support of the long gun registry. However, that is simply not the case.

In April 2006, more than 11 years after the Firearms Act was introduced, the president of the Winnipeg Police Association said, “The Winnipeg Police Association has never supported the long gun registry”.

The Manitoba Police Association, which includes Winnipeg, Brandon and rural police associations, passed a motion in the spring of 2006 calling on Ottawa to scrap the registry.

The head of the Saskatchewan Federation of Police Officers stated in 2006, “We've been against it right from the beginning....That's been our position since 1994 and it hasn't changed”.

The deputy police chief of the Toronto police stated last year that, “The $1 billion could be better spent elsewhere”. He said, “It really has done nothing to solve the crime problem. The gun registry registers legal guns. Gangsters don't register their guns”.

Many other local and provincial police associations as well as working police officers across Canada oppose a long gun registry that focuses on law-abiding Canadians, not criminals. We need to remember that the firearms registry contains both firearm registration and individual licensing information.

Parties opposite have claimed that the government is in some way getting rid of gun control in Canada. That in no way represents the government's position.

All firearms owners will still be required to be licensed and will be screened for public safety. That will not change. Individual licensing information, critical for determining whether an individual may or may not lawfully possess firearms, will be maintained and will remain available to police across Canada.

In fact, the government is focusing resources more effectively on what works best in our system. That is why budget 2007 commits $14.2 million over two years to enhance screening new firearms licence applicants.

For the first time, this investment means that 20,000 new licence applicants and their two references will be interviewed by a firearms officer before determining that applicants should be issued his or her first firearms licence. That is a real investment in public safety and that is the difference between this government and the previous one. We want to focus on what works best and what is the greatest benefit to Canadians. We believe that rank and file police officers will join with us in meeting that objective.

Business of the House

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, when we return to the House on Monday, there will be exactly two weeks left before the normal adjournment for Christmas. I wonder if the government House leader could inform us in his usual comprehensive way as to what he expects to be dealing with in the first week of December. Also, because there is only that two week window after we come back, I wonder if he could offer any advice about the second week of December as well. Specifically, I wonder if he plans at any point in that two week period to call Bill C-21.

Firearms Registry

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Mr. Speaker, recently the Quebec National Assembly unanimously demanded that the firearms registry be maintained, and it condemned the federal government's Bill C-21.

How can the Minister of Public Safety ignore the demands of parents and victims of the Dawson College tragedy, ignore the Quebec National Assembly's unanimous appeal, and pursue its intention to remove hunting guns from the Canadian Firearms Registry? For all practical purposes, this would render the registry useless.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

If we are going to proceed that way, then perhaps at the meeting the following week we could have agenda items that deal with Bill C-12 and the report. I forgot the gun registry, Bill C-21. Perhaps we could have that on the agenda to discuss how we're going to proceed.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Criminal Code

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Minister of Public Safety]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-21, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act (non-registration of firearms that are neither prohibited nor restricted).

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)