This bill is from the 39th Parliament, 1st session, which ended in October 2007.
Stockwell Day Conservative
Second reading (House), as of June 19, 2007
(This bill did not become law.)
This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament has also written a full legislative summary of the bill.
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.
All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.
Bill numbers are reused for different bills each new session. Perhaps you were looking for one of these other C-21s:
Criminal CodeGovernment Orders
An hon. member
There were so many scandals they are blurring.
Criminal CodeGovernment Orders
The Acting Speaker Andrew Scheer
Order. Let us let the hon. member for Etobicoke North finish. Do you have anything else to say on this particular question? The hon. member for Etobicoke North.
Roy Cullen Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
Mr. Speaker, I have not even begun. However, regarding the accounting treatment, I think the member will have to go back and read the public accounts more carefully, because he certainly will not be getting any answers from me on that.
I must say though with regard to putting a police officer on a judicial council to help in the choosing of judges, frankly I was not quite as upset about that. That is why I support mandatory minimums for gun related crime and our party supports mandatory minimums for gun related crime, because that has been shown to work. Having the police as part of the selection process, I do not have huge difficulties with that myself.
I saw a case the other day. There were two young people racing down Mount Pleasant Avenue in Toronto. They killed a taxi driver. They were going about 140 miles an hour. Those two young people were put on house arrest. I think that is tragic. I think judges should use their discretion better than they do.
Dave MacKenzie ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time tonight with the member for Northumberland—Quinte West.
It is an opportunity for me to discuss Bill C-21. This legislation addresses firearms control, an area of great concern to all Canadians. Everyone who watches the news knows how prevalent gun violence has become in some communities and this is extremely troubling.
Gang members carrying illegal handguns and brazenly settling scores in public areas have brought fear to cities across the country. In some neighbourhoods, people witness gun violence regularly but are intimidated into silence by criminals. This kind of criminal activity must be stopped. Canada has always had the reputation of being a peaceful country. We must do something now to help ensure this remains the case, and that means cracking down on violent crime.
The government made a commitment to protect Canadians and that is what we intend to do. Bill C-21 is part of the government's larger plan to strengthen the safety and security of Canadians. The government has taken steps over the last year to keep Canadians safe and to do so in a way that simplifies compliance for law-abiding citizens.
The first responsibility of any government should always be to protect its citizens from harm but governments should also be careful to do this in a way that law-abiding citizens can comply with easily. This government is working diligently to ensure that this balance is respected.
We have introduced Bill C-21 to reinstate a balance between protecting Canadians and easing requirements for responsible firearms owners. I would like to highlight some of the public safety measures our government has taken in the past year. The government has an overall plan for safer communities and Bill C-21 fits within our vision of a safe and prosperous Canada.
First, the government felt that policing and law enforcement needed to be bolstered in Canada. In budget 2006, we invested a significant amount of money to give the RCMP additional resources to focus on law enforcement priorities. These included the expansion of the RCMP's National Training Academy, known as Depot; increasing the DNA samples on file to include a greater range of offenders; support for a special contingent of first nations RCMP; and an additional 1,000 RCMP resources to focus on drugs, corruption and border security.
Now in Budget 2007, we have continued this support for our national police services to protect children from sexual exploitation and trafficking and supporting the Canadian Police Research Centre's work in science and technology in policing and public safety.
Furthermore, we are taking action to crack down on white collar crime by appointing a senior expert adviser to the RCMP to help develop and guide the implementation of a plan to improve the effectiveness of the integrated market enforcement teams. We are also investing $80 million over two years to make the Canadian Security Intelligence Service's operations more effective.
On another front, the government took steps to strengthen our borders in a way that keeps legitimate goods and people moving across the border and threats out of our country. We put in place a plan to start arming border guards. Through our plan, approximately 4,800 officers will be trained and armed. This includes 400 officers who will be hired so that no officer will be required to work alone. Some of these officers will be deployed as early as this summer and we expect that by March 2008, between 200 and 250 armed officers will be working at the border.
There is another issue that affects our communities directly and that is youth crime. Many communities in Canada have youth crime problems. It can sometimes mean vandalism, drug abuse or even gang involvement.
Our work is based on the principle that the surest way to reduce crime is to focus on the factors that put individuals at risk, factors like family violence, school problems and drug abuse. We aim to reduce crime by tackling crime before it happens. That is why my hon. colleague, the Minister of Public Safety, announced in January $16.1 million in funding for youth at risk. These projects are funded through the National Crime Prevention Centre and they help youth make good choices and stay or get back on the right track.
Firearms control should focus on criminals, not on law-abiding and responsible firearms owners.
I hope that the hon. members of this House can now better understand the broader public safety context within which our gun control measures operate. Gun control is but one of many ways we are working to protect Canadians.
The object of today's debate, Bill C-21, deals with an aspect of the firearms control program that has been at the centre of discussion ever since the introduction of the Firearms Act in 1995: the registration of non-restricted firearms. These are ordinary rifles and shotguns most often used for hunting.
Why do we wish to abolish the requirement to register these firearms? The answer is twofold. The first reason is that we are not convinced that the registration of non-restricted firearms prevents gun crime. The second reason comes back to what I said earlier. Governments have a responsibility to direct limited to resources where they will have the most effect. With respect to gun control, we believe this means investing in measures that focus on criminals rather than on law-abiding citizens.
The most recent example of this was the successful raid carried out in Toronto last week that resulted in over 60 arrests and the seizure of 30 illegal guns, dealing a significant blow to a notorious street gang that terrorized the neighbourhood. Protecting the most vulnerable is where our limited resources should be directed to, not inundating law-abiding citizens with cumbersome rules and regulations.
Therefore, the government has decided to remove the registration requirement for legitimate and responsible non-restricted firearms owners and focus on gun crime.
Indeed, to achieve this very goal, my colleague, the hon. Minister of Justice, tabled a bill on May 4, 2006 to strengthen the mandatory minimum sentences for violent gun crimes. The government has introduced a number of legislative initiatives that target gun crimes and we encourage opposition MPs to support these initiatives.
Bill C-10 passed third reading in the House on May 29 and is awaiting second reading in the other place. Bill C-10 proposes escalating minimum penalties for specific offences involving the actual use of firearms. These offences include attempted murder, sexual assault and kidnapping, among others. Minimum penalties are also proposed for certain serious non-offence uses, such as firearm trafficking and smuggling. The higher minimum penalties rest on specific aggravating factors such as repeat firearms offences, use of restricted or prohibited firearms or the commission of firearm offences in connection with a criminal organization which includes a gang.
Bill C-35 is another important piece of legislation on our agenda to tackle gun crimes. It deals with the burden of proof during bail hearings for firearm related offences.
These reforms will lower the risk that people charged with serious offences may reoffend while out on bail. It will also reduce the risk that they may take flight to avoid facing trial for the charges. This bill was also recently passed by the House of Commons and is awaiting second reading in the Senate.
These new measures send a clear message that the Government of Canada will not tolerate gun crime on our streets and in our communities. However, as the members of the House no doubt know, firearms control includes much more than handing tough sentences to those who commit crime. Firearms control includes measures that aim to prevent firearms from falling into the hands of ineligible individuals.
The registration of non-restricted firearms has not proven itself to be effective in accomplishing this goal. In fact, in our view the most effective system currently in place that accomplishing that goal is licensing. We have the support of many groups that agree that licensing is the critical information necessary.
As deputy commissioner of the RCMP, Peter Martin, stated to the public safety committee:
If we go to a residence on a call, we're not interested in articles in the house as much as the person in the house and what they have available to them.
The critical piece of information right now is who is licensed and who has the potential to have in his or her possession a firearm, regardless of whether it's a long gun or a restricted or prohibited weapon.
Through the steps that an individual must take to obtain a licence, authorities can determine if the individual in question poses a security risk. The steps include passing the exams for the Canadian firearm safety course, passing the background checks that are performed using police files and answering personal history questions to identify the possible safety concerns such as serious problems with substance abuse. The answers to these questions must be corroborated by two references who have personally known the individual for at least three years.
Screening individuals before they are issued a licence is paramount to an effective firearms control system. Even once a licence is issued to an individual, a continuous check is performed through an automated link between the Canadian firearms information system and the Canadian police information system or CPIC. If any new information is entered on the CPIC system by police, such as a report on threats made to another person, the firearms information system automatically checks to see if the person in question is a firearms licence holder. If so, steps can be taken to suspend or revoke the licence and law enforcement authorities are notified so they can take appropriate action to remove the firearms.
Bill C-21, is an important piece of legislation that would re-establish the proper balance in the area of firearms control. It would ease the requirements for firearm owners while ensuring that records of firearm purchases continue to be kept. Our government believes that resources should be invested to keep Canadians safe. However, we believe in investing those resources in effective initiatives and programs. That is why we have focused on areas such as law enforcement, border security, youth crime and, of course, gun control. In all cases we are taking a results based approach.
I therefore encourage all members of the House to support Bill C-21.
Paul Szabo Liberal Mississauga South, ON
Mr. Speaker, I think it is fair to say that Bill C-21 would have the effect of basically scrapping the gun registry in that it would eliminate the requirement for registering non-restricted firearms, which are rifles and shotguns, about 5 million to 6 million firearms, which effectively guts the purpose of the registry totally.
If there were clear evidence that the lives of 100 police officers were saved as a consequence of having that registry would this bill be before us today? I believe the answer is that it would not. Members would not support this bill because of the importance of the registry.
Given that police officers have indicated that they use the registry some 5,000 times a day, which is the reported amount, I would then ask the member if the lives of 100 police officers would stop this bill. What is the member's number? How many police officers is he prepared to live with in terms of deaths?
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Mr. Speaker, first, the hon. member starts with the wrong premise. We are not scrapping the registration of firearms. What we are scrapping, and it is not a total scrapping, but it is the elimination of the registry of long guns.
We have been registering firearms in this country since 1934. We are talking about handguns. Handguns are our primary concern.
The member's whole premise on this thing is about something that is out there that I do not know has any basis in fact. Simply put, this would actually strengthen gun control, while at the same time eliminating the need for the registry for non-restricted firearms.
Rob Moore ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety.
I sit on the justice committee but I also represent my constituents as an MP in my riding. I have had concerns from my constituents from day one on this issue that it unfairly targets law-abiding citizens and that it creates an unbelievable burden on seniors. I am speaking specifically about many of the seniors in my riding.
I have real life examples of women in my riding, widows over 80 years old, who are concerned and lose sleep at night because of the requirement that their long gun be registered, the old shotgun that used to belong to their husband and is now theirs. Are these the people we should be targeting?
On the one hand, we have the program that the Liberals invented, a scheme that was supposed to cost $2 million and ended up costing over $1 billion, targeting 80-year-old women.
On the other hand, I sit on the justice committee and the Liberal members have opposed our government's legislation that would actually crack down on criminals. I thought that was the idea, not to go after law-abiding people but to go after criminals.
Does the member have any comment as to why Liberal members on the justice committee would oppose our Bill C-10 that targets criminals and yet they continue to go after grandmothers?
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Mr. Speaker, I suppose the easiest answer is no, I would not understand why they would want to target senior citizens who have had guns in their homes for years and years and not strengthen the Criminal Code with respect to penalties for those who commit crime.
Mario Silva Liberal Davenport, ON
Mr. Speaker, a lot of research out there has shown that when it comes to gun related violence, of the OECD member countries, of which Canada is a member, no country has a higher incidence than the U.S.
I know there are many things we can learn from our American friends to the south but certainly the issue of the gun culture that they have there is not one we would like to emulate in this country.
Study after study will show that in countries where there is tough gun registration and gun laws there is--
Criminal CodeGovernment Orders
The Acting Speaker Andrew Scheer
Order. I have to cut-off the hon. member there to allow the hon. parliamentary secretary a chance to respond.
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Mr. Speaker, I have sat through this debate and I guess it is fair to say that members opposite have not had direct involvement in the field.
I was involved in policing for 30 years. I have a son, a son-in-law and a nephew in policing. If I thought that the gun registry would save one life of a police officer, one of my family members, I would be the first to support it.
There is not a police officer who would trust the information in there when he or she makes a decision to approach a house. It is an ineffective system.
Rick Norlock Conservative Northumberland—Quinte West, ON
Mr. Speaker, I am grateful for this opportunity to show my support for Bill C-21 concerning the repeal of the requirement to register non-restricted firearms. The Government of Canada strongly believes that it is vital to protect the safety and security of Canadians. In fact, it is our top priority.
I am often saddened and even shocked by what is happening in some of our communities. Blatant acts of violence committed by gun-toting criminals all too often make the headlines. There are too many perpetrators and there are too many victims. We hear of gang members gunning down their rivals on sidewalks or in parking lots, or even in local parks where children play. We see the reports of them waving handguns openly in neighbourhoods, frightening residents into complete silence about what is going on in their area.
These acts are committed by criminals, people who show no regard for our laws. Therefore, the government believes it is time to put in place effective gun control measures that work, while streamlining requirements for law abiding citizens. This will help to ensure the focus stays where it belongs, on those who would harm our families and our communities.
The government introduced Bill C-21 to eliminate the requirement to register non-restricted firearms, generally ordinary rifles and shotguns, by legitimate firearm owners, while maintaining important safeguards to help protect Canadians. It is important to focus on measures that keep guns out of the wrong hands and that the public safety is protected.
Let me first clarify an important issue, the difference between licensing and registration. Licensing focuses on the individual. It is a way of identifying who can own a firearm. Individuals who want licences must meet various criteria that help to ensure they do not pose a risk to public safety.
However, registration focuses on the firearm. It involves providing a complete description of a firearm to firearms program employees, who then add the information to a database. Authorities can then know which licenced owner owns the firearm.
If passed, Bill C-21 would repeal the requirement to register non-restricted firearms, that is to say, ordinary rifles and shotguns such as those used for hunting. There are two reasons behind this decision.
The first is, as I have previously mentioned, to ease some requirements for law abiding owners of non-restricted firearms who have been demanding that this requirement be eliminated for many years.
The second reason is of even greater importance. The government believes that registration does not prevent gun crime. We believe that we must invest resources where they can be most effective. Under the current firearms program, an individual must hold a licence to possess or obtain a firearm, or to obtain ammunition. This will continue.
Bill C-21 requires that everyone who purchases a non-restricted firearm will have to have his or her licence verified. This can be done through a simple phone call to the firearms centre.
The government is committed to strong, reinforced licensing. Budget 2007 invested $14.2 million over two years to enhance the screening of 20,000 new applicants for restricted licences every year. This is a real investment in public safety and it was an area totally neglected by the previous government which did not provide resources to fulfill this important task effectively.
As it now stands, to obtain a new licence for any class of firearm, including a non-restricted firearm, a person must pass the required Canadian firearms safety course exams. The course was developed in partnership with the provinces and territories, national organizations with an ongoing interest in firearms safety, and many firearm and hunter education course instructors from across Canada.
I have heard completely inaccurate comments from the Liberal benches that we are doing away with gun control. This is completely false and ridiculous. What we are determined to do is to make gun control focused and more effective. Indeed, firearms safety training is something that firearm owners and users support, and this government believes in.
We recognize that firearms safety starts with well trained, law abiding firearms owners. That is why we are maintaining the requirement for safety training as part of the firearms program. In this way we will help protect Canadians from possible tragic accidents. Teaching firearms owners how to store their firearms safely and securely helps prevent children from accessing those firearms and can reduce the chance that firearms could be stolen.
During the election campaign we made a commitment to keep Canadians safe. When it comes to firearms safety, an ounce of prevention is certainly worth a pound of cure.
There is another requirement individuals must meet before they can be issued a firearms licence. They must pass a background check. Background checks are performed by chief firearms officers or their representatives who employ law enforcement systems and resources to ensure the individual in question has not committed a serious criminal offence in the recent past, is not under a court sanctioned prohibition order for firearms, and does not pose a threat to public safety.
As I mentioned earlier, in budget 2007 we committed $14.2 million over two years to enhance the screening of new firearms licence applicants. For the first time, this investment means that each year 20,000 new restricted licence applicants and their two references will be interviewed by a firearms officer before determining whether that applicant should be issued his or her first restricted firearms licence.
These resources were not provided by the previous government. Instead, it funded a long gun registry that we know does not work, but our government is determined to invest in what really benefits public safety.
While a background check is run before every applicant is issued a licence, another type of verification is also carried out by authorities. The Canadian Firearms Information System, which houses all information on firearms licence holders and registered firearms, is connected to the Canadian Police Information Centre known as CPIC.
This means that every time information on a person of interest is uploaded in CPIC, for example, information on someone who has threatened to harm his or her neighbours or colleagues, the Canadian Firearms Information System runs an automatic check to see if that person is a licence holder.
If the person is a licence holder, the chief firearms officer of the province is warned and action can be taken to follow up on the case. If an investigation shows that the person is a threat to public safety and should not be allowed to own firearms, the individual's licence can be revoked. The police are then made aware of the situation and can take the appropriate action.
This process is called the continuous eligibility check. It is done automatically and allows for the proper identification of licence holders who should no longer be in possession of firearms.
Background checks and continuous eligibility checks are critical in helping to ensure that firearms are only held by responsible law abiding citizens. However, ordinary citizens also have a responsibility to the firearms program when it comes to protecting public safety.
The firearms program has a 1-800 public safety line that individuals can call if they believe someone could pose a threat or should not be allowed to have firearms. That number is indicated on the form the applicant must fill out for a licence and that the applicant's spouse signs. This means that the spouse as well as the references have access to this number, so they can call and inform the chief firearms officer of their concerns, even if they feel pressured to sign the form.
Through the steps that come before the licence is issued and the ongoing checks while a person holds a licence, authorities know who is entitled to own a firearm. This is the type of tool the Government of Canada believes is effective in protecting the public.
It is clearly evident that licensing is the most important dimension of a firearms control system. This is because licensing screens the individuals themselves regardless of the types of firearms they intend to acquire.
That said, as I mentioned before, we are maintaining the registration of restricted and prohibited firearms. These firearms include handguns, some semi-automatic long guns used for target shooting, and gun collecting and other automatic weapons.
Individuals can only possess restricted firearms and prohibited handguns for legitimate purposes such as target shooting or collecting. Target shooting has a long history in Canada and covers all types of firearms disciplines right up to competition at the Olympic level.
As hon. members can see, our work on gun control is part of a larger effort to strengthen the overall safety of Canadians. We believe in focusing our efforts on those who would harm our families and our communities, not on law abiding—
Criminal CodeGovernment Orders
Charles Hubbard Liberal Miramichi, NB
Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the hon. member and probably have two questions for him.
First, in terms of our police in this country, is there any advantage to them to know, when they go to a home to arrest somebody or to deal with a domestic dispute, whether or not there are firearms at that location?
Second, I wonder if the hon. member could explain to the House what in fact this bill would do. We know that there are licences, in fact two types of licences: to acquire a firearm; and also to own one, to posses one. With that, is it the intention of the government to do away with the licensing of the owner, of the person who plans to acquire it?
Because in my experience, the major complaint in this country has been the need for a renewable licence. The average farmer or sportsman who has a rifle, or a long gun, probably only has to register that once in his lifetime and it is not an onerous problem to license a gun. However, to maintain a licence to own a gun over a period of time, there has been a fee involved. Does the hon. member and his government intend to do away with that five-year fee?
Rick Norlock Conservative Northumberland—Quinte West, ON
Mr. Speaker, the member first started out with: Is it not a good idea that police officers know if there are firearms at a residence and if a person has a licence to possess a firearm? It is yes to both those questions.
However, the important issue here is how the police officer is trained. A police officer is trained to approach every residence, when he or she receives a call, as if there were a firearm on the premise. It would be foolhardy, quite frankly, for the police officer to make any assumption otherwise.
I think it is very important that individuals be licensed to make sure that they know how to handle firearms and that they are the right kind of person; in other words, there is no criminality or mental condition that might preclude them from owning a firearm.
If the police officer approaching the residence has the name of a person and runs it, as I mentioned, in the CPIC system and it comes back that the individual is licensed to possess a firearm, it is reasonable to assume that there are firearms on the premises. Whether there is one or fifty is—