Bill C-21

An Act to amend certain Acts and to make certain consequential amendments (firearms)

This enactment amends the Criminal Code to, among other things,
(a) increase, from 10 to 14 years, the maximum penalty of imprisonment for indictable weapons offences in sections 95, 96, 99, 100 and 103;
(b) establish a regime that would permit any person to apply for an emergency prohibition order or an emergency limitations on access order and allow the judge to protect the security of the person or of anyone known to them;
(c) deem certain firearms to be prohibited devices for the purpose of specified provisions;
(d) create new offences for possessing and making available certain types of computer data that pertain to firearms and prohibited devices and for altering a cartridge magazine to exceed its lawful capacity;
(e) include, for interception of private communications purposes, sections 92 and 95 in the definition of “offence” in section 183;
(f) authorize employees of certain federal entities who are responsible for security to be considered as public officers for the purpose of section 117.07; and
(g) include certain firearm parts to offences regarding firearms.
The enactment also amends the Firearms Act to, among other things,
(a) prevent individuals who are subject to a protection order or who have been convicted of certain offences relating to domestic violence from being eligible to hold a firearms licence;
(b) transfer authority to the Commissioner of Firearms to approve, refuse, renew and revoke authorizations to carry referred to in paragraph 20(a) of the Act;
(c) limit the transfer of handguns only to businesses and exempted individuals and the transfer of cartridge magazines and firearm parts;
(d) impose requirements in respect of the importation of ammunition, cartridge magazines and firearm parts;
(e) prevent certain individuals from being authorized to transport handguns from a port of entry;
(f) require a chief firearms officer to suspend a licence if they have reasonable grounds to suspect that the licence holder is no longer eligible for it;
(g) require the delivery of firearms to a peace officer, or their lawful disposal, if a refusal to issue, or revocation of, a licence has been referred to a provincial court under section 74 of the Act in respect of those firearms;
(h) revoke an individual’s licence if there is reasonable grounds to suspect that they engaged in an act of domestic violence or stalking or if they become subject to a protection order;
(i) authorize the issuance, in certain circumstances, of a conditional licence for the purposes of sustenance;
(j) authorize, in certain circumstances, the Commissioner of Firearms, the Registrar of Firearms or a chief firearms officer to disclose certain information to a law enforcement agency for the purpose of an investigation or prosecution related to the trafficking of firearms;
(k) provide that the annual report to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness regarding the administration of the Act must include information on disclosures made to law enforcement agencies and be submitted no later than May 31 of each year; and
(l) create an offence for a business to advertise a firearm in a manner that depicts, counsels or promotes violence against a person, with a few exceptions.
The enactment also amends the Nuclear Safety and Control Act to, among other things,
(a) provide nuclear security officers and on-site nuclear response force members with the authority to carry out the duties of peace officers at high-security nuclear sites; and
(b) permit licensees who operate high-security nuclear sites to acquire, possess, transfer and dispose of firearms, prohibited weapons and prohibited devices used in the course of maintaining security at high-security nuclear sites.
The enactment also amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to
(a) designate the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness as the Minister responsible for the establishment of policies respecting inadmissibility on grounds of transborder criminality for the commission of an offence on entering Canada;
(b) specify that the commission, on entering Canada, of certain offences under an Act of Parliament that are set out in the regulations is a ground of inadmissibility for a foreign national; and
(c) correct certain provisions in order to resolve a discrepancy and clarify the rule set out in those provisions.
Finally, the enactment also amends An Act to amend certain Acts and Regulations in relation to firearms so that certain sections of that Act come into force on the day on which this enactment receives royal assent.

Criminal Code

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Madam Speaker, in his speech, my colleague talked about those two little words, “hunting gun”, which were in the government's first definition of prohibited weapons. He saw that and raised a hue and cry, accusing the big bad Liberal government of wanting to prohibit hunting guns.

When we saw that, we took action. We went to see the government. We asked it to go back to the drawing board and take those words out of the definition because they caused confusion. We asked the government to remove the list it was trying to put in the Criminal Code that would have prohibited weapons that are reasonably used for hunting. That was the Bloc Québécois's approach, and it succeeded. We now have a new definition that does not include hunting guns.

Instead of hitting the panic button and scaring hunters, instead of spreading disinformation about the bill, the Conservative Party could have worked with the Bloc Québécois to improve this bill.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

Madam Speaker, alas, I do not have any constituents who wrote to me in French so that I could read what they think of this bill. I do want to remind him that the member for Rivière-du-Nord said, when Bill C-21 came out, that they could not have done better. It is therefore completely ridiculous to hear some members now brag about having worked hard when they agreed with the Liberals' bill.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, to my hon. friend for Calgary Shepard, I do enjoy the use of Yiddish proverbs. One comes to mind from Tim Robbins from his novel, Still Life With Woodpecker: “Life is like a stew, you have to stir it frequently, or all the scum rises to the top.” Here in this place we have to stir and stir and do what we should do for Canadians, which is to give them the best possible service as MPs.

I ask the member, in that context, if he does not find it troubling that the very bills that have been, with due respect, hyped up in terms of rhetoric by the Conservatives in the House are the ones that come back to him. Does he think that perhaps it would behoove my friends in the Conservative Party to try to be more balanced in what is wrong with the bill, what is good with the bill and how we work together to give Canadians the best possible meal and keep the scum from rising to the top?

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

Madam Speaker, I am a little worried in the way the member just described my constituents who are emailing me on this issue. They deserve to be heard, not to be name-called. They are concerned not because of what we are saying on this side of the House; they are concerned because the contents of the legislation are bad news for them.

I do not need to go around in my constituency raising up fears. They are fearful on their own. I have had many meetings on Bill C-21 and firearms legislation in the past six to eight months from constituents who do not reach out to me on a regular basis. I invite the member to come out to my riding, an urban Calgary riding, where this is the second most important issue. They deserve to be read into the record.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Madam Speaker, this is an interesting evening and an interesting debate, but we need a little history when we are talking about guns.

The Chinese invented gunpowder, and by the 10th century they figured out how to put it in bamboo and invented guns. By the 13th century, we had the old metal barrels attached to them. By the 17th century, we figured out how to do muzzle loaders. By the 20th century, there was the Lee-Enfield gun and the Ross rifle. In the First World War, Canadians were quickly dumping the Ross rifle, a beautifully made Canadian gun that had no place in the trenches of World War I, so they could find a Lee-Enfield. By the way, we still use that rifle in an indigenous context, and the rangers in the north are still using the Lee-Enfield rifle. The Canadian Ross rifle is long gone. Today, the most popular hunting rifle in Canada is the .30-06 Springfield gun.

I have shot a .30-06. I am not an avid hunter, but I have shot most guns. When I grew up, as kids we started with air rifles and then moved up to BB guns. Yes, we had those, and our mothers always warned us that we were going shoot each other's eyes out eventually with those things. We were pretty good at taking them apart, putting them back together, finding other parts and making them work. However, we did progress to the bigger guns as we got older.

To the point we are talking about, the Prime Minister has said, “there are some guns, yes, that we're going to have to take away from people who were using them to hunt”. That is concerning, in a sense. Some people say we are out there spreading falsehoods and not talking about the truth, but when the Prime Minister says that, people get a little concerned.

There is a list of places in my riding. There is the Bassano Gun Club, the Brooks & District Fish & Game Association, the Brooks Pistol & Smallbore Rifle Club, the Mossleigh Gun Club, the Taber Pistol & Revolver Club, the Taber Shooting Foundation, the Vauxhall Fish & Game—Rod & Gun Club, the Hussar Fish and Game Club, the Milo gun range and the Vulcan and District Gun Club. These are shooting groups within my riding.

There is a report out there about violent crime. It said that of all instances of violent crime in Canada, a rifle or shotgun was present in 0.4% of cases. There is a lot of violent crime, a 32% increase, but very little has a rifle or shotgun.

It has been said many times in the House today that the Liberals introduced legislation by order in council. They have put about 1,500 types of guns in there. That did not go so well, so finally they introduced legislation, Bill C-21, about a year later. Then it headed to committee stage, and at the end of the committee stage, the Liberals dropped in a bunch of amendments, 500 pages' worth of them. We pushed back, and they withdrew those. Then they finally introduced more legislation.

We can tell that legislation is really flawed when the government brings in a zillion amendments to its own legislation. It is nuts. We can tell how flawed it is through the process that has been going on for three years. It is not well-designed legislation and will not work in the end.

Last, the Liberals put in an advisory committee. What is the advisory committee for? It would get to define more stuff afterwards. What? It is not in the legislation, other than that it is there. More consultants are going to be hired to figure out how to do an advisory committee.

The root cause of this, in my mind, is legislation that has been passed, Bill C-75, on bail reform. The police, whom I have met with a lot over the years, for rural crime in particular, work really hard to solve crimes and find criminals. However, after the police get the criminals charged and go to all that work, those guys are out in the parking lot in their vehicles before the police can get out of the courthouse. They are out there stealing another car before the police can get out of there.

The bail reform bill the minister announced today does not go anywhere near covering the problems we have with Bill C-75. Violent crime is up 32%.

I want to talk a bit more about the organizations in my riding. One of them is the Brooks Pistol & Smallbore Rifle Club. It had an economic study done. It found that for events in 2021, $337,000 came in from non-residents to this one gun club in my riding. The economic output for that year for one gun club was $1,088,000. That is one club out of the many I listed. Some 46% of people spent more than $500 a person in my community on accommodations and food. This is what those organizations do and this is what the government wants to get rid of.

Sport shooting furthers youth in firearms training, local hunter education, and safety in firearms and handling courses. There is a place where the local police and conservation officers come for their training and recertification, but this legislation would get rid of it. Sport shooting is a huge part of our communities. I listed the different places in my riding where people learn how to properly use sport shooting equipment. What this piece of legislation is going to do is eliminate them.

How about Canada-wide, as that is one constituency? Regarding the impact on sport shooters in Canada, according to a survey conducted in 2018, Canadians spent an estimated $8.5 billion on hunting and sport shooting, with Albertans accounting for more than $1 billion of that number. A survey also found that the recreational firearms industry accounted for 48,000 jobs. Small businesses that have an inventory of things to support sport shooting are now going to lose part of their businesses. Part of their businesses, the government says, is going to be illegal. Sport shooting is done.

Sure, we will grandfather the people who have them. However, what we will have is a bunch of old people like me left in the gun clubs because that is who will be left with the guns. New youth will not be trained, will not know how to use them and will not be involved in competitions. This hurts small businesses in this country.

I want to go back to my quote one more time. The Prime Minister said, “there are some guns, yes, that we're going to have to take away from people who were using them to hunt”. The problem we have here is that people do not understand sport shooting. In a rural area like mine, guns are tools that families grow up with. They are tools in the ranching business and in the farming business. They are useful tools and needed tools.

This piece of legislation is flawed. It has been three years making its journey to where it is now, and it will not work in the end. It is not going to deal with illegal handguns. The problem we have is gang violence and criminal activity, and this will continue on. This legislation will not stop it. In fact, handguns will become more valuable on the black market, and the criminal element is going to make money off that. This is a flawed piece of legislation and it will not solve crime.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Madam Speaker, my colleague mentioned bail reform and the need for violent, serious offenders to face stricter scrutiny when released on bail. Today, our government tabled Bill C-48. Many different stakeholders, including the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, have come forward and are very happy with the proposal put forward. In fact, the president of the Canadian Police Association said this is “common-sense legislation”.

I am wondering if we can count on the member opposite to fast-track this legislation and make sure we have unanimous to pass it in the House so it can go to committee and then off to the Senate?

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague across the way. We have worked on a few things in the past on a few committees, and I appreciate working with him.

When someone has a young child or a baby, one of the most exciting times is when they are months old or a year old and take their first step. We get excited. We take pictures. We phone their grandparents and say, “My baby took their first step.” That first step is so small in the life of a child given what they can do. It is all they have done. It is so small. It is not going to touch what they can do when they can run. That is what we will do as we cover the legislation on bail reform, because we can run to do it.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Madam Speaker, at the beginning of his speech, my colleague talked about hunting rifles. I have two questions for him.

Here is the real question. According to him, is the current bill about hunting rifles, yes or no? We know that hunting rifles are not affected by this bill.

The second question is the following. When the member alluded to that, he claimed that the Prime Minister said that this bill affected hunting rifles and therefore that appeared to be true. Is the member telling us that the Prime Minister always tells the truth?

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Madam Speaker, it is getting late in the day and the humour is getting really good. It is hilarious. I thank him for that second one.

Going back to the first one about rifles, has anyone been to Cuba? It has great cars but only up to about 1958 because it cannot get any newer cars. That is what this legislation does. It says someone cannot buy a new gun after a certain date, so we are going to be left with relics, guns that do not work and guns that are broken. One way to get rid of hunting rifles is by saying people cannot buy a new one.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, a lot of criticism of this bill has come from the very groups that have organized for years to ban the guns that they believe, with their evidence, are used to kill people. Groups have formed in Quebec, for instance, that recall the massacre at École Polytechnique, and they are angry with the Liberals for weakening this bill.

In this debate tonight, and on Bill C-21 in general, there are certainly flaws with how the Liberals have delivered this legislation. I will not disagree with that. However, it is becoming a dialogue and debate that is deeper in rhetoric than in fact. I think it is important to note that advocates for gun control are very disappointed with the government.

I wonder what my colleague makes of that in light of his criticisms.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Madam Speaker, I would totally agree with the member. I am totally disappointed with the government as well. We would totally agree on that. I think the government has flawed legislation; it really does. I think it is going to eliminate sport shooting. There is fact in that.

I had a student who went through school and became a world-class fencer. She started when she was in elementary school with a local high school coach. She was in the Olympics four times. She used a sword. That is a weapon. She could learn that when she was in elementary school. We have eliminated the possibility for youth in our country to do sport shooting at the Olympic level. That is a fact, not rhetoric.

[Lianne Rood, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Madam Speaker, today I rise to talk about how the Liberal Party has turned its back on law-abiding firearms owners, while it has given gangs and criminals the green light to continue terrorizing our streets with little worry of any consequences.

Bill C-21 is nothing more than the government's overreach, an attempt by the Liberals to push forward their flawed ideology on firearms ownership. Nobody believes that going after hunters, farmers and sport shooters or legitimate hunting rifles would reduce violent crime in this country. Hunting and farming have been part of the fabric of this country since it was formed. Canadians, especially rural Canadians, enjoy their way of life peacefully and lawfully.

I am an RPAL holder. As a farmer, I understand too well the challenges that are faced by rural Canadians. I have been on the land at night, by myself, and I am vulnerable to any wildlife that may be prowling around in the dark. Being stalked by an animal is real. It is necessary to have a firearm for protection. It is one of the tools that farmers use.

Last November, the Liberals' eleventh-hour amendments to Bill C-21 showed how out of touch they are. Hunters, firearms owners and indigenous Canadians all said in unison that Bill C-21 is an overreach. That sent the Minister of Public Safety into hiding.

Here we are, six months later, with an updated bill. There is no update; it is the same bill with different packaging. Hunting rifles are safe today, but the new Liberal firearms advisory panel could decide that hunting rifles should be banned. Instead of allowing for debate, the Liberal-NDP coalition voted to limit time on this debate and to push this bill through. Sport shooters, hunters and indigenous Canadians are very concerned about the passing of this bill.

How do criminals feel about the bill? In early February, the Liberals voted against, and defeated, Bill C-283, a Conservative private member's bill, which would have imposed tougher sentences for criminals caught smuggling or found in possession of illegal guns.

On February 18, 2021, the government introduced Bill C-22, which would actually reduce the sentence for illegal gun smugglers and remove mandatory minimum sentences for a list of serious offences. These crimes are exactly what the government claims it wants to stop, yet it continues to vote down legislation that would do just that.

Does this sound like a government that is serious about tackling gun crime? Instead of getting tough on gun crime and gun smuggling, the Prime Minister let Canadians know that he is in fact targeting hunters, collectors and sport shooters and their firearms. In a recent CTV interview, he said, “Our focus now is on saying okay, there are some guns, yes, that we're going to have to take away from people who were using them to hunt”.

Hunters, indigenous Canadians, sport shooters and academics see through this Trojan horse bill. I could easily quote from dozens of stakeholders on how useless this bill would be in tackling gun crime, but I will quote one that encompasses my view and the sentiment of my party. Mark Ryckman from the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters said the following:

Firearms are not the disease, particularly in a nation like Canada with robust gun laws. Gun violence is often symptomatic of much bigger societal issues. Taking firearms away from law-abiding Canadians will not reduce the upstream issues that fuel criminal activity and demand for illicit firearms. Therefore, model-based firearm prohibitions will continue to fail as they won’t be able to have a detectable impact on reducing gun violence or enhancing public safety.

Both Canadians and Conservatives see this bill as ineffective. It should not pass, but if it does, Conservatives will repeal this bill once we form government.

It is interesting to note how the NDP is willing to sacrifice rural communities for this flawed bill. The rural NDP MPs all know Grandpa Joe and once spoke on his behalf. The Liberals have succeeded in muzzling the NDP on ideological grounds. The law-abiding hunters, indigenous Canadians and sport shooters in NDP ridings should remember how their voices were silenced by their NDP representatives.

Conservatives would not confiscate their firearms. We know they are not the problem. We will be voting against Bill C-21. We see through the Liberal plan to distract and divide, and we are glad that they do too.

Let us talk about those illegally obtained guns and start with the obvious. Criminals do not buy their guns at a store, and they do not register them. The public safety minister's own statistics prove that 70% of guns used in crime in Canada over the last 10 years were illegally smuggled across the border.

That is why Conservatives believe that the government should invest in police anti-gang and gun units. The Canada Border Services Agency should provide law enforcement with the resources it needs to stop illegal smuggling operations. The minister says that there is more money going to border security, but we see little difference being made. Illegal guns are still coming in.

Frontline officers, investigators and those doing the gritty work of securing our borders and streets are fighting an uphill battle. Surely, funding would be used to employ more staff in that department.

In 2015, when the Liberals took power, we had just under 8,400 frontline workers. In eight years, under the current government, only 25 more have been added. What has grown? The number of middle managers has grown. In 2015, there were 2,000 managerial staff. Today, there are 4,000. One should not misinterpret my words as a critique of middle management; I really appreciate all the work our public servants do for our country and to keep us safe, but when dealing with border security, our frontline staff should be the main priority.

Bill C-21 includes two changes to the Criminal Code that directly impact airsoft. In my riding of Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, there are a lot of people who are involved in airsoft. The first change is to the definition of “replica” in subsection 84(1) of the Criminal Code, which encompasses more than 95% of airsoft blasters. The ambiguity of the bill could increase it to all airsoft. Many pellet guns, realistic paintball markers and even toy guns are being banned.

The economic impact of treating airsoft like firearms is a big one. The airsoft industry contributes $220 million to the Canadian economy. In large portion, these businesses are owned by immigrants and visible minorities. Many airsoft- and paintball-loving constituents in Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, along with 60,000 other Canadians, risk losing their beloved hobby. The lack of common sense that the Liberals are showing is insane. How can they make a connection between gun crime, airsoft and pellet guns? If this bill does not scream overreach, then I do not know what does.

When asked why the government is not getting tougher on criminals, the Liberals' default is to say that they implemented a prohibition on “military-style” assault rifles. We know that they mean hunting rifles. First, the term “military-style” assault rifle is of course invented, with no legal definition, but it does sound scary. The reality is that fully automatic weapons have been banned in Canada for years. Therefore, when people talk about AK-47s, they have been banned since the 1970s in Canada. As I have said from the start, these and other weapons like them were never registered. Nobody can own one. They are illegally obtained and will continue to be unless the current government strengthens the sieve that is our border.

There are 230,000 Canadians who have signed a petition saying they do not agree with the government's legislation, and I join them in their opposition. In the last federal election, Conservatives were clear that we would get tough on gangs by giving law enforcement the tools it needs to keep Canadians and our streets safe, cracking down on illegal gun smuggling, and repealing Bill C-71 once and for all.

A Conservative government would also restore mandatory prison times for criminals who use a firearm in the commission of a crime and significantly increase funding and coordination for border security to crack down on illegal firearms smuggling. We would review existing firearms legislation to ensure it focuses strictly on dealing with criminals rather than making life more difficult for law-abiding firearms owners, and we would restore mandatory minimum sentences to keep violent gang members off the street and focus on gangs and criminals by ending automatic bail, revoking parole for gang members, and having new and tougher sentences for the ordering of or involvement in a gang crime.

Bill C-21 does not address the major cause of gun crime in Canada. All MPs really owe it to the victims of violent crime in Canada, past, present and future, to get serious about gun smuggling, gangs and criminals.

A closure motion and one day of debate is all we were afforded to speak to Bill C-21. Canadians have been clear that this bill does not address gun crime, yet the Liberals continue to keep their heads in the sand. My constituents are common-sense people, like many others in this country. Bill C-21 is another proof that the Liberals have lost the plot and are more interested in pushing their own ideology than listening to law-abiding Canadians.

I cannot support this bill.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Madam Speaker, I have to give the hon. member and her colleagues credit; it is getting late in the evening, but the hysteria and hyperbole continue to mount.

I am looking at a site here that shows 532 different rifles for sale legally in Canada; they are non-restricted. Where do the Conservatives come up with this idea that hunters will not have access to rifles? There are hundreds, probably thousands of models available out there, so why are they pitching this story?

[Lianne Rood, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Madam Speaker, the reality is that we live in a vast country. We live in a country that has predominantly agriculture in our rural areas. We have pastimes in this country. Since the inception of this country, we have used hunting rifles, and the Liberals are coming and targeting law-abiding farmers, hunters, indigenous Canadians and sport shooters. They are targeting things that are pastimes in Canada, which we have done safely for years in this country.

Quite frankly, the bill would do nothing for crime. It would not do anything to protect people on the streets or to remove gangs and criminals from our streets who are smuggling those guns illegally over our border.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Speaker, I talked about that earlier when I was asking questions and sharing my thoughts on Bill C-21. This ongoing disinformation campaign is shocking.

I heard the member say that hunters would be affected. Again, that is an improvement the Bloc Québécois brought about thanks to my colleague from Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, who got the notion of hunters removed from the definition. It is no longer there. I also heard the member talk about airsoft guns. That is another improvement to the Bloc Québécois's credit. Let me reiterate the Bloc Québécois's position. We succeeded in getting the clause prohibiting airsoft guns deleted. Airsoft association members will be happy.

In both cases, what she said was completely false. Those things are not in Bill C-21.