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.

Motion that debate be not further adjourned

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I can assure my hon. colleague from London that, as he knows, we have been working with rural communities and first nations communities right across the country.

In fact, I have spent a good, considerable period of time with a number of experts in gaming and hunting in the Yukon, where I had a chance to see how they participate in their traditions. I have nothing but the utmost respect for the way in which they participate in their traditions in a way that is safe and secure. I have also assured them, as we have done with indigenous communities, that this bill would reflect their lived experiences. What does that mean in plain and simple terms? It means that this bill would not target them. Rather, it would go after criminals. It would go after AR-15 assault-style firearms. Yes, it would implement a national freeze on handguns, because handguns have been growing by approximately 55,000 new registrations every year and they have concurrently become the number one type of gun used in homicides.

Those are the types of evidence-based, informed policies that are in Bill C-21, and that is why it would help save lives.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there are at least two serious mistakes in the premise of the Conservative member's question. The first is that we are not going after criminals. In Bill C-21, as I have just mentioned, we would raise maximum sentences from 10 to 14 years for illegal gun traffickers. That is an important and powerful signal to anyone who would try to terrorize our communities that they will run the risk of going to jail for a longer period of time.

The Conservative member also referred to prevention. That is precisely what the government is doing with a $250-million building safer communities fund. I would point out that the Conservatives have opposed the building safer communities fund's allocations, which will save lives through prevention by providing mental health services and other supports for people who are at most risk. The Conservatives are also against Bill C-21, which would give law enforcement the additional tools to go after criminals who use firearms to commit crimes. That is why their position is so misguided.

On this side of the House, we are doing the work. We are making sure that we pass responsible gun control legislation, but we are also taking action at the border and advancing strong prevention strategies.

[Rob Morrison, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we have a real problem with gangs and violence. Violent crime is skyrocketing. We are talking about Bill C-21, which talks about taking legal guns from legal gun owners.

I want to ask the minister, since the government uses evidence-based policies, what percentage of crimes are committed by people with illegal guns, and what percentage are committed by people who have actual legal guns? The answer to the second is going to be zero. After 35 years in policing, I know that answer. Why not put that money into education programs and forget Bill C-21? Scrap Bill C-21. It would not be effective.

I agree that we need to have gun laws, but the government is targeting people who have legal guns. Why not go after the ones who have illegal guns, the criminals?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

I believe that is the intent, although he can't actually make a motion to do so because we're engaged in this motion.

I think we require unanimous consent to withdraw the motion. If there is no objection, we can consider the matter withdrawn.

Is there any objection to Mr. Julian withdrawing his motion?

(Motion withdrawn)

The motion is withdrawn. We will therefore carry on with clause-by-clause on Bill C-21.

We left off at the last meeting at the end of clause 2, and we're starting clause 3.

(On clause 3)

First up is Mr. Noormohamed, with G-11.

Please go ahead, sir.

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

Thank you very much, Chair.

I find it interesting as well. As my colleague Mr. Shipley indicated, the resources tonight are difficult. We are sitting in the House until midnight and there are other committees that are sitting late as well. Again, I find it astounding that we would consider a motion for which we don't even know whether it's going to be possible to sit past our 6:30 time slot.

In any event, why is it necessary to be in the spot that we're in? Why did Mr. Julian feel it was necessary to put a motion forward?

I want to reiterate and correct his assertion that we're not halfway through. If you look at the amendments before us, there are 25 of them that add the words “firearm part” in the clauses coming forward. I don't see that taking 20 meetings.

Let's actually talk about the meetings. On January 31, there was no meeting and no good reason was given for why we didn't have a meeting. February 3 was the meeting where the amendments were withdrawn, so we know why we didn't have a meeting on January 31. On February 7, we did the Russia study, not Bill C-21—

[Doug Shipley, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

I understand that.

Again, parliamentary procedure is not always my strongest point. We have people who can do that type of thing.

This is how we got here in the first place, by dropping amendments at the last minute that weren't reviewed properly. This has happened a couple of times now, as far as the Conservatives are concerned, and it's happened a couple of times with major amendments.

Today we're getting a motion that might happen, it might not, but we're sitting here wasting time when we could be on Bill C-21 talking about whether we're going to go again.... I'm getting tired of putting the cart before the horse. I'm here to do work. I'm here to do what people elected us to do, and that is to pass good legislation.

Mr. Chair, once again I'm a little frustrated and I wanted to voice that concern.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is a real privilege to talk about Bill C-21 and to really stand up against it.

Getting an honest answer from the minister is difficult. We have tried. I remember being the one in SECU who actually got the witnesses to admit that law-abiding hunters' firearms were on the banned list. The Liberals have tipped their hand, and most firearms owners across the country know that. I have spoken with Liberal members of Parliament who do not necessarily like the way their own government is going on firearms.

This is really a call-out to the NDP. I just heard members from the island. I have been to the Campbell River Gun Club, where people brought huge concerns forward around Bill C-21 and the freedom to access their legally obtained firearms. Again, these are citizens who are vetted on a daily basis. The stats support that people who have a firearms licence are far less likely to commit a crime than an average citizen is. These are impeccable citizens being shown complete disrespect by the Liberal minister.

Again, my question for the New Democrat members is whether they will finally stand with their constituents and oppose this legislation.

[Doug Shipley, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

We have all kinds of time tonight. I love spending time with my colleagues well into the evening. There's no issue, but we're sitting here now and we're talking about trying to get through Bill C-21. Right now, we're talking about a motion that you just said we don't have resources for. Why are we doing things backwards again? Why don't we jump into Bill C-21 and get through this?

What is the point of debating a motion that we don't have the resources for? Maybe the chair can illuminate me on that.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Michaud and Mr. Paul‑Hus are right, an English word was left in the French version inadvertently.

I want to say that I'm proud to speak French and that, in the past, I have pointed out French errors in texts submitted by the Conservative Party and even the Bloc Québécois. I feel a little awkward having introduced an NDP motion with errors in it.

If we also remove the words that are repeated, the French version of the motion reads as follows:

Que le Comité prolonge sa réunion du 9 mai 2023 jusqu'à minuit pour faire l'étude article par article du projet de loi C‑21.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I don't intend to speak for a long time. I know that Bill C-21, particularly the issue around ghost guns, is something that law enforcement wants to take immediate action on. We need to move forward in a forthright manner.

I have a motion that was circulated to committee for the purposes of today's meeting. I move:

That the committee extend its meeting of May 9, 2023, until midnight for clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-21.

Mr. Chair, I heard yesterday in the House something that I felt was profound disinformation. It was said by the Conservative public safety critic that almost half of the amendments had been considered at committee, and that's simply false. As you know, Mr. Chair, since we started again, we've considered 12 amendments out of 151. You can do the math, as I have, Mr. Chair. I note that, at this rate, we simply would not have this bill back to the House for months.

Why is it urgent? We know, because of the delays.... These delays were caused by what I felt were the Liberals' misplaced amendments, which were done without consultation. Now we have the Conservatives filibustering, so they're also causing a delay. During that time, Mr. Chair, we've seen an exponential increase in the use of illegal, untraceable ghost guns across this country.

The House is seized by an expansion of scope, which will be important, but we need to provide law enforcement with the tools. We need to be targeting criminals. The withdrawal of the amendments means that those who would be targeted by this Bill C-21 are criminals, not law-abiding gun owners. It's important that we move in a forthright way.

I've been raising this issue, as you know, Mr. Chair, for a couple of weeks now, to vastly expand the number of hours. The committee has the ability to do that. I'm proposing that we do just that for the purposes of today's meeting—to meet until midnight.

I hope we can come to a consensus rapidly on this. I don't intend to draw it out if there are members who are opposed, but I do believe that it's an important step that we need to take for public safety. We need to move this bill forward, and we can't do that if it continues to be stuck in the committee.

Since it's taken so long to consider the initial amendments, it's important that we allow more time today for clause-by-clause consideration of this bill. That's what I'm proposing. I hope we have a consensus around this table about the importance of studying Bill C‑21 and passing it to combat the threat of ghost guns. The study has dragged on long enough. Now we need to move forward. That's why I'm introducing this motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

I call the meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 65 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security.

We will start by acknowledging that we are meeting on the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin people.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of June 23, 2022. Therefore, members are attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom application. With regard to a speaking list, the committee clerk and I will do the best we can to maintain a consolidated order of speaking for all members whether they are participating virtually or in person.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Thursday, June 23, 2022, the committee resumes consideration of Bill C-21, an act to amend certain acts and to make certain consequential amendments regarding firearms.

I will now welcome the officials who are with us once again.

Welcome. It's always good to see you.

From the Department of Justice, we have Sandro Giammaria, counsel; and Phaedra Glushek, counsel, criminal law policy section. From the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, we have Rachel Mainville-Dale, acting director general, firearms policy. From the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, we have Rob Daly, director, strategic policy, Canadian firearms program; and Kellie Paquette, director general, Canadian firearms program.

Thank you for joining us once again today. Your participation is, of course, crucial to our deliberations.

I will now invite Mr. Julian to take the floor, please.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague on this side of the government aisle is correct. The vast majority of Canadians, approximately 80% of Canadians, support a national ban against AR-15 style, assault-style firearms. They support a national freeze on handguns.

Handguns have become the number one type of gun used in homicides. Canadians support and want to see action that will allow us to reverse the disturbing and alarming trends of domestic abuse and the presence of guns. Again, women are disproportionately victimized as a result of the presence of guns. We want to reverse those trends.

We want to save lives, which is precisely why we need to move forward with Bill C-21. Were it not for the Conservatives who continue to obstruct and obfuscate, we would be able to do that more quickly. That is why we are taking the step that we are today, and we will continue to engage with all Canadians so we can keep them safe.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Mr. Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. Contrary to the ongoing efforts by the Conservatives to stoke fear, we respect gun owners, farmers and the first nations communities who use firearms responsibly. I have engaged with all of them, and we have gone to great lengths to make sure we are weaving their experiences into our laws.

Therefore, rather than stoke fear and disinformation among Canadians, it would be far more productive if Conservatives were prepared to have a debate based on facts, not fear. That is what we are doing with other parties in this chamber, including the NDP and the Bloc, and I want to thank them for their collaboration on Bill C-21.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Mr. Speaker, one of the observations I have made during my time in this place is how much the Liberal government loves to hinder Canadians and their freedoms.

We saw Bill C-11 get rammed through the House. We more recently saw how Beijing interfered in our elections in this country. An hon. colleague of mine, and his family in Hong Kong, were threatened and intimidated, and the government did nothing. We have seen the government move time allocation on bills over and over again to ram them through.

Specifically, with Bill C-21, we see a government that wants to take away rifles from hunters, again wanting to thwart the freedom Canadians have, and not entrust them with the tools for a basic lifestyle. I am curious as to why the government is so distrusting of Canadians.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have worked very closely with my friend and colleague, the member for Surrey—Newton, when it comes to keeping our communities safe.

As he knows, we recently made an announcement in his riding that will provide additional grassroots support to the organizations providing mental health services, educational supports and career supports, especially to those young people who are at the greatest risk of being exposed to gun violence.

I want to emphasize that this is a government that is squarely focused on three priorities when it comes to reducing gun violence: strong borders, strong laws and enforcement, and strong prevention. Together, with the support of a number of other opposition parties, it is my sincere hope that we will pass Bill C-21 so we can put in place strong gun control laws to save lives.