Bill C-19 (Historical)

Ending the Long-gun Registry Act

An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act

This enactment amends the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act to remove the requirement to register firearms that are neither prohibited nor restricted. It also provides for the destruction of existing records, held in the Canadian Firearms Registry and under the control of chief firearms officers, that relate to the registration of such firearms.

Ending the Long-gun Registry Act

[Anne Minh-Thu Quach, NDP, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, I will make no apologies for the argument I am making about the firearms registry. If all weapons were registered, it would allow us to monitor firearms more closely and there would be fewer weapons on the black market and thus fewer untraceable weapons readily available to criminals. We need greater control to prevent situations like the one that occurred in British Columbia in 2007—as mentioned in the RCMP report—and the one that occurred on October 25 with the replica AK-47s imported from China from happening again. We need all these tools so that police can intervene in a correct and appropriate manner.

[Pierre-Luc Dusseault, NDP, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the hon. member for Beauharnois—Salaberry. Is the government standing up for victims by doing what it is doing right now? We know that a number of victims' groups want to keep the firearms registry. By acting this way, is this government living up to its claims that it always stands up for victims?

[Anne Minh-Thu Quach, NDP, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for his question. On the contrary, I think that with this bill, the Conservatives are simply trying to keep a promise without any consideration for the thoughts and concerns of the victims' groups, the police forces, the public, or for public safety. This is truly an unwillingness to listen and to work together with all parties to advance matters in a constructive manner.

[Rob Clarke, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to speak in favour of the ending the long gun registry bill.

It has been nearly 17 years since the previous Liberal government imposed the wasteful, ineffective long gun registry on Canadians, which is ironic.

In March 2008, I was the first active RCMP officer to be elected to the House of Commons. It is also ironic that I was also the first Conservative first nations member to be elected to the House of Commons.

My riding is entirely in northern Saskatchewan, and is actually two-thirds of the province. Obviously, many of the communities are very remote. As a result, firearms are a way of life where I come from, and in my daily life in the RCMP, I saw firearms being used in a legal way. There are those who make their living as farmers and use a shotgun to protect their crops and livestock, and there are those who are first nations, Métis or non-aboriginal who use a rifle to hunt for sustenance. However, these facts seem to have evaded the previous Liberal government.

When the long gun registry was established as part of Bill C-68, it was done with the intention of protecting Canadians from gun crime.

I had five or six years' service when the gun registry was being imposed and I recall listening to my fellow RCMP members, the constables, the corporals and the sergeants. I heard them say that the long gun registry would be ineffective, that $2 million would not be substantial enough and that there would be lots of cost overruns. Obviously, it was ill conceived as its fundamental focus is on those who are predisposed to follow laws, regulations and rules.

It is abundantly clear that adding needless red tape to every long gun owned by a person in Meadow Lake, La Ronge and La Loche does nothing to stop criminals from getting their hands on guns in cities. The real way to ensure that we can keep our streets and communities safe is through smart investments in crime prevention and establishing tough, effective sentences for those who break the law.

It reminds me of one incident that took place. I was on patrol in a first nations community and saw someone drive a pickup truck down a road, turn to an approach and then turn its lights off. I proceeded to follow. Upon entering the residential lot, I saw an offender pointing a rifle at a residence with individuals inside. I exited the vehicle and he nearly turned his gun on me.

It is kind of ironic that less than a year later we had to investigate a murder in which this individual, in a rage of anger, had thrown his young infant son against a door frame. If the proper sentencing had been in place to deal with this offender, I believe that this offence would not have been committed and one more young child would have become an adult.

Through these measures we can ensure that crimes do not happen in the first place and that dangerous criminals who insist on harming others are kept behind bars where they belong.

Over the past five years our government has taken concrete steps in both these areas. Then as now, we are committed to keeping Canadians safe and not increasing needless bureaucracy.

Frankly, front-line police officers agree that the long gun registry is not a tool that is useful in day-to-day operations.

I served as an RCMP sergeant. I can say from experience that decisions that my colleagues and I made regarding our safety were not based on information we obtained from the long gun registry. Every complaint was always treated as a firearm complaint. Even when we were serving a summons or a subpoena, we treated the residence as if there were a firearm inside and took the necessary precautions.

Members opposite, specifically the NDP member for York South—Weston, frequently suggest that eliminating the long gun registry will lead to the death of police officers.

I have another personal experience. At 9:25 p.m. on July 7, 2006, in Spiritwood, Saskatchewan, I was on duty and on patrol. A domestic assault occurred in which the mother and sister were assaulted by Curt Dagenais. Subsequently, a pursuit ensued in which chase was given down remote grid roads. As a result, two members were shot and mortally wounded. The members' names were Marc Bourdages and Robin Cameron. One week later, they died from their wounds. This is something I remember every day. Was the gun registered? Yes.

I think there is more of an underlying issue there. The individual had continuous run-ins with people in authority, from transport police to the RCMP to anyone in authority. The individual also faked his own death.

Under our omnibus crime bill, if that individual were charged today, we would still have those two members here working and serving our country.

Any time police officers go into a potentially volatile situation, they do so knowing that there is always a chance someone will have a firearm or other weapon. There was a time when I would leave home knowing the risks of putting on the uniform and knowing that it might be the last time I would see my family.

A list of all weapons, not to mention a list that is well known to be inaccurate, is not a reliable tool. To say that a vote to scrap the long gun registry is a vote against the safety of police officers is simply not accurate.

I want to be clear. The NDP and the Liberals claim to be standing up for law enforcement, when, in reality, it is only our government that has consistently delivered to our men and women in uniform.

Every time a measure comes to the House to give police the tools they need to do their jobs, be it tougher laws, better investments or more funding, police officers from coast to coast to coast count on the opposition to obstruct, delay or oppose them, which is why I find it strange that members opposite are all of a sudden best friends of those in uniform.

When I look at our Conservative caucus, I see 11 members who have all served our country. We have all taken the risks to serve our country. At one point or another, all of us have had to make a decision to go into volatile situations where our lives were deeply at risk.

I was a police officer and I did not find the long gun registry to be a useful tool to prevent crime. Last Friday, I sat with six members from Prince Albert and all of them said that we should get rid of the long gun registry.

First, as a police officer, I can tell members of this House that the long gun registry is not a tool to prevent crime or to keep Canadians safe. In fact, the Canadian Police Association stated:

The Government received a clear mandate from the last election to proceed with their proposed changes to the long-gun registry.

We respect the message that voters have sent on this issue.

...any changes would have minimal impact on public safety.

We look forward to continuing to work with the Minister to find effective tools and resources to keep guns off our streets....

We're quite satisfied with the efforts this government has made to work on behalf of front-line police officers, specifically with respect to the comprehensive justice legislation that has been a priority since the last election.

I challenge any member who votes to keep a $2 billion boondoggle to show me a single statistic that empirically proves we are safer with these measures.

Second, the long gun registry targets the wrong people, the northerners, the first nations, the Métis and law-abiding duck hunters.

I call on all members of this House to support this very important legislation and to ensure its speedy passage.

[Rosane Doré Lefebvre, NDP, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I greatly appreciated the hon. member's speech, especially when he spoke about the police officers in his region who told him that no one was using the registry and that it was absolutely useless. In my province, police officers consult the registry every time they are called to intervene at a home or elsewhere.

I would like to ask the hon. member why this government is so set on not wanting to transfer the firearms registry data to Quebec, when the National Assembly is unanimous in asking it to do so and police officers use that data every time they answer a call. I would like to hear what he has to say about that.

[Rob Clarke, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the one issue that stands out is the privacy issue. It is a federally run system and to provide it to another jurisdiction would be wrong.

The member talked about executing duties. Every time I stopped a vehicle on the side of the road, I would run a licence plate. However, I would be out of the vehicle before I received that information. I would not know whether that person had a weapon. Therefore, every complaint must be treated as if a weapon is involved, whether it be a long gun, a restricted weapon or a knife. It is always about officer safety and using common sense.

[Rosane Doré Lefebvre, NDP, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to come back to the fact that the National Assembly of Quebec has asked for the firearms registry data. I find there is a great deal of stubbornness on the other side of the House on this. The Conservatives say they were elected on the promise to abolish the firearms registry and they add that if the provinces want to create a firearms registry, then they can go ahead. We know full well that the Canadian firearms registry cost the Canadian taxpayers $2 billion. Our constituents are saying they paid for this registry and they want to keep the data.

I would like to know what the hon. member is thinking of telling these constituents who want to get their money's worth and who, in Quebec for example, want to recover the data.

[Rob Clarke, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the data is three years old, only seven million guns were registered and it cost over $2 billion.

My colleague, speaking on behalf of Quebec, wants to take information on western Canadians, Ontarians and east coast people for Quebec to use. That will not happen. If Quebec really wants it, it can come up with $2 billion and pay for the registry itself.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, being a front-line officer, my colleague can speak with a degree of certainty and experience that no one else in the House can claim, unless they are former police officers.

Would the member expand on why front-line officers say that they cannot depend on the data in the long gun registry? When police officers go on a call and the registry indicates that there are two firearms in that residence, do those officers actually believe there are only two firearms? What is the procedure when officers go into a situation and want to ensure that all weapons, whether they are firearms, knives or bats, are cleared out of the situation? Could my colleague please explain that for us?

[Rob Clarke, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

Mr. Speaker, it comes down to basic simple investigational tools. A lot of the information on the registry is three years old. If a person has one or two guns, there is no doubt that he or she will have four, five, six or seven guns. I have experienced a situation where a person had over 100 guns. He was a gun collector and many of those weapons were registered.

It also comes down to common sense investigations. Officers make neighbourhood inquiries. They ask the family. They gather all the information, collect the data and then make the proper judgment from there. It is always about officer safety and about looking after communities and their safety.

Police officers always treat every complaint as if a weapon is involved. That is where some of the mistakes are made. We call it tombstone courage. Some officers are being harmed because they trust this data when it is in default.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I was never a police officer but I was the justice critic for a number of years in the province of Manitoba. This provided me with the opportunity to meet with numerous police officers over the years. The gun registry was one of many issues on which we had a great deal of dialogue because it has been around for a good number of years.

This is where it is a bit unbalanced, if I can put it that way, in terms of a Conservative member who proclaims that he was an officer of the law and that he does not support the gun registry.

[David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The member for Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River was a member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. He is not proclaiming to be a police officer.

[The Acting Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

I think the issue is a matter of debate. It is not really a point of order. We will go back to the member for Winnipeg North.

The hon. member for Winnipeg North.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I detect a little sensitivity on this issue. The reality of the situation is that there is no unanimous opinion coming from our police forces, whether it is the RCMP or the local police.

Many would argue that a vast majority of people serving in our police forces, our RCMP included, support the gun registry. If members were to talk to many of them, they would hear that this is just one of many tools that they have access to. It does not necessarily mean that they do not consider whether there will be a gun when they approach a door. They will always take that into consideration. However, it is one of many tools that the police have been using now for a number of years.

I have found that the government, more than most governments that I have witnessed in my tenure as an elected official, tends to exaggerate the truth or maybe be a little tricky in terms of what it says to the public. A good example of that is the previous speaker talking about over $2 billion. We all know that is completely fictitious. It is not true. However, the Conservatives continue to play on that issue even though they know it is not true. Our national auditor has indicated that is not the case. The Conservatives try to give the opinion that the cost of the gun registry is hundreds of millions of dollars and huge expenses going forward from today. Again, we know that is not true. We know that the annual cost is somewhere between $2 million to $4 million.

Providing straightforward information and facts is missing from this debate. I would suggest to members that it is something that is often missing from debate when we talk about government legislation that is before us, and it is somewhat shameful. If we were actually listening to what people had to say about the gun registry, not a small percentage, members would find that the information quite often somewhat contradicts what members are saying inside this chamber in regard to this particular bill.

[The Acting Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

Order, please. I would just remind hon. members, in the course of debate in respect to these subjects, one has to be somewhat careful that one does not impute motive with respect the truthfulness of subjects that are mentioned in the House. I know the hon. member is somewhat close to that and I would just caution him to take some care in the way in which these ideas are expressed.

The hon. member for Winnipeg North.