Bill C-5

An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act

This enactment amends the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to, among other things, repeal certain mandatory minimum penalties, allow for a greater use of conditional sentences and establish diversion measures for simple drug possession offences.

[Matthew Hipwell, President, Wolverine Supplies]

Good morning, and thank you for the opportunity to speak this morning.

My name is Matt Hipwell. I grew up in the firearms industry and lifestyle in rural Manitoba. As a youth, I was involved in various shooting sports. I was a member of Team Manitoba in the Canada Winter Games for the sport of biathlon. I spent a short stint in the Canadian Armed Forces reserves prior to joining the RCMP. I spent nearly 17 years in the RCMP, posted throughout Manitoba. During that time, it was front line policing, plain clothes drug enforcement, firearms training and use of force, and eight years with our emergency response teams. I feel I have a very diverse background in this sector, whether it be on the civilian side or the law enforcement side.

After leaving the RCMP, I joined the family business, Wolverine Supplies. I subsequently took an early retirement to move into the firearms industry, which supports and provides firearms to sports shooters, hunters, recreational shooters, law enforcement and the military across the country.

Historically, the government has spent billions of dollars on firearms legislation and regulations. However, in my opinion, we fail to get to the root cause. Mr. Bertrand touched on a few of those, with borders being one of them. We need to get to the root cause of the problem. When we want to solve a problem, using the analogy of building a house, we don't start with the roof and build down; we start with a strong foundation. I believe this is where we are lacking. We need to start at the bottom and work our way up.

This involves working with all partners. We often look at the law enforcement community only—if that—but there are the border and border services, the police and social services, whether they're child and family services. There are all of those different avenues that we need to be speaking with.

One partner that often gets overlooked is the industry. Our Canadian firearms industry is wide and diverse, just like our country is. There is a lot of expertise. There's a lot of knowledge across the country. This is overlooked when it comes to firearms regulations, licensing and so forth. We need to involve everyone, so that we can come up with the best common-sense solutions that will lead all Canadians to lead a safe lifestyle.

Currently, we have firearms regulations before Parliament. One is the order in council that prohibited over 1,500 types of firearms. As we've just heard, however, what has that stopped? Firearms violence has not stopped. It is still continuing. The legislation in place only affects the legal owners and the legal firearms that the government knows about and where they are. We need to get to a strategy that gets to the root. We need to look at the rationale, and we need to be consistent along that.

As was just spoken about, we have legislation that reduces sentences for violent offences. For example, under Bill C-5, some of the proposals are reducing mandatory minimum sentences for the offences of using a firearm or an imitation firearm, possession of a firearm while knowing it's unauthorized, possession of a weapon obtained by a crime and, one that leads back to our borders, importing or exporting knowing it's unauthorized. If we're reducing these mandatory minimum sentences, we are failing to hold people and individuals accountable for their actions. We need to get that accountability back and hold people accountable.

Along with this, I recently observed through CTV News an exposé on the homicide rates in Toronto. In Toronto this year, in 2022, there have been 12 victims, seven of whom were under the age of 25 and five of whom were under the age of 20. Out of the 17 people charged, 14 were under the age of 23 and eight were under the age of 20. This ties in with your social media and everything else being longer and longer.

We need to get to the root cause. Some of the legislation that's in place has been in place for years and has failed to reduce gun violence as it was originally intended.

Justice

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to ensure that the idea behind Bill C-5 is put forward this evening.

Bill C-5 advances an evidence-based approach to sentencing policies in Canada. It proposes to repeal MMPs for certain firearm offences and all those in the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act in order to address unjust outcomes for indigenous peoples, Black Canadians and marginalized Canadians by remedying their overrepresentation in custody, including for offences punishable by an MMP.

MMPs have high economic and social costs, and they offer little or no return on our investment. They perpetuate unfair outcomes and offer a less effective criminal justice system. Bill C-5 is an important step that breaks away from rigid, one-size-fits-all sentencing policies that treat lower-risk and first-time offenders the same as hardened drug offenders. The reforms in this—

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

Madam Speaker, I want to start by acknowledging that I am speaking to members from the traditional lands of the Algonquin people.

I am pleased to have an opportunity to speak to Bill C-5. I intend to focus on some areas where there appears to be some misunderstanding about the impact that repealing mandatory minimum penalties from the Criminal Code will have on our justice system and society more broadly.

I want to direct the member to take part in the committee, as well as the process where amendments can be made. We would welcome and review all amendments put forward by members at committee.

Let me make this clear from the outset. Repealing MMPs for certain offences does not signal that these offences are less serious. Instead, the government is aiming to restore judicial discretion to impose fit and appropriate sentences in more cases. These changes will also help address systemic racism and discrimination in the criminal justice system. Our approach is smart on crime and we will not take lessons from the previous Conservative government's failed approaches.

In Canada, sentencing courts are always required to consider public safety when imposing a sentence and to ensure that the system reflects both the seriousness of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender. I have faith that sentencing courts will continue to impose fit and appropriate sentence. I would also note that the courts understand the seriousness of offences involving firearms. For example, the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Nur confirmed that serious penalties should be imposed for our firearm-related offences when circumstances warrant it.

Here are the facts. The MMPs targeted by this bill have disproportionately affected indigenous peoples, Black Canadians and members of marginalized communities. In 1999-2000, indigenous peoples represented 2% of the Canadian adult population, but they accounted for 17% of admissions to federal custody. Since then, those numbers have risen significantly. As most recent available data suggests, they now account for 5% of the Canadian adult population, but 30% of federally incarcerated individuals.

What is more is that Black Canadians are overrepresented in terms of federally incarcerated individuals, representing only 3% of the Canadian adult population but 7% of federally incarcerated individuals. They are also overrepresented in respective import-export offences subject to MMPs in the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

It is hard to ignore the evidence that shows negative trends that span well over a decade and have only been getting stronger. Repealing the MMPs in Bill C-5 would not reduce public safety. In fact, these reforms would contribute to enhancing public safety because data shows imprisonment, particularly for lower-risk offenders, is associated with higher rates of reoffending.

Bill C-5 offers an important way forward. It is evident from the calls for reform made by Canadian stakeholders, as well as organizations and commissions, such as the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, that they believe these reforms will move criminal justice in the right direction. Having said that, I look forward to the member's feedback during the committee stage of this bill.

[Alex Ruff, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Madam Speaker, I asked for this time in Adjournment Proceedings to give the minister another opportunity to answer a very simple question I asked him in the House in December with respect to Bill C-5: Is he willing to accept an amendment?

Opioid Crisis in Canada

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions and Associate Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, are we to understand from my colleague's comments that he agrees with Bill C‑5, which seeks to eliminate policies that have filled our prisons with people who needed help and that ultimately targeted vulnerable and racialized Canadians?

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade]

Madam Chair, it is a pleasure to join this evening's debate. I want to thank the member for Yukon for initiating the very important subject matter we are discussing today in the chamber.

Something my constituents in Parkdale—High Park speak to me about regularly is the issue of opioids, opioid use and the opioid crisis that is claiming lives in Parkdale—High Park, in Toronto, in Ontario and right around the country. The deaths were occurring prior to any of us ever hearing about COVID-19, and they have continued throughout the pandemic, in some months exceeding COVID death rates. Unfortunately, these deaths will likely continue once we have finished with the pandemic. This underscores the urgency of taking action on this pressing issue.

The history of what we have done as a party was underscored very recently in this debate: treating the issue of opioid use, and drug use generally, as a health issue, not a criminal issue. I therefore want to turn back the clock a bit and remind Canadians about where we were prior to the election in the fall of 2015.

At that time, we had a government led by Stephen Harper that was basically denying this health nexus. That government was denying supervised consumption sites, or supervised injection sites as they were then referred to, from proceeding. With the inability of the previous government to grant exemptions under the relevant federal legislation to allow supervised injection sites to occur, this ended up at the Supreme Court of Canada in a case called Canada v. PHS Community Services Society. In a unanimous 9-0 decision, which is somewhat rare for the Supreme Court of Canada, written by the chief justice, the court affirmed the constitutional rights that were at issue and sided soundly with the applicants in the case, going against the Harper government.

I am going to read into the record part of what was said. In paragraph 136 of that decision, the court said, “The Minister made a decision not to extend the exemption from the application of the federal drug laws to Insite.” Insite was the applicant seeking to run the supervised injection site. “The effect of that decision,” the court wrote, “would have been to prevent injection drug users from accessing the health services offered by Insite, threatening the health and indeed the lives of the potential clients.” There is the nexus. By denying that ministerial exemption, drug users' lives were threatened.

The court continued: “The Minister’s decision thus...constitutes a limit on their s. 7 rights,” which would be the rights to life, liberty and security of the person. The court went on to say, “this limit is not in accordance with...fundamental justice. It is arbitrary...[and] grossly disproportionate”. It said, “the potential denial of health services and the correlative increase in the risk of death and disease to injection drug users outweigh any benefit that might be derived from maintaining an absolute prohibition”.

There the court said in a unanimous decision that what we are doing by denying the ability to run a supervised injection site is threatening the lives of Canadians. That is what was so heinous about the approach of the previous government. In October 2015, an election occurred, and we have had a different orientation on this side of the House since we have taken power.

What have we done since then? We got to work and approached this as a health care issue and an addiction issue, as opposed to a criminal matter. We passed legislation in the 42nd Parliament on it, Bill C-37. Rather than withholding discretion, we started to provide discretion, subject to the parameters that were outlined by the court in its jurisprudence. Supervised consumption sites then blossomed.

Since 2016, the record of this government has been to provide 38 different supervised consumption sites, which are operating, and grant the exemptions that have been required. We are trying to empower supervised consumption sites. We are also taking a fundamentally different approach toward diversion and toward treating drug use differently.

As to what that comports with, I can talk about Bill C-5, which has been tabled in this House. I had the honour to speak to it in December. We are taking an approach that is endorsed by the director of public prosecutions, who is at the federal level in the prosecution service, and the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police. They have said that rather than using police resources to criminalize people who are using drugs, we should be approaching this from a different perspective by offering them treatments and getting them out of the revolving door of the criminal justice system.

That is the approach we have taken, but much more needs to be done. It is why participating in this debate is so critical this evening. I am looking forward to advocating on behalf of my constituents, who want to see the needs of drug users attended to so we can avert the concerns we are facing now with the opioid crisis.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Madam Chair, I will be sharing my time with the member for Parkdale—High Park.

The year 2021 became British Columbia's deadliest year for overdose deaths, with 1,782 people losing their lives and two months' worth of data still to come. In October alone, there were 201 deaths, which roughly equates to six and a half a day, but behind each and every number are beloved sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers, and the families and loved ones they leave behind.

I want to take this opportunity to honour two parents in my riding by telling the stories of their late children.

First is the story of Annie and her son Alexander.

Alexander was an athletic and creative soul who loved his family deeply, especially his daughter Bella, but he had experienced several traumatic events in his life, including the murder of his best friend. As a result, he struggled with anxiety, depression and PTSD. After a car accident, he was prescribed oxycodone by a doctor, but his struggle with mental health left him vulnerable to addiction, and he became dependent on it. Despite this, Alex managed to stop using by himself in 2016 and was able to maintain his sobriety until the pandemic hit. Unfortunately, Alex died on January 18, 2021, from carfentanil and benzodiazepine poisoning just days before his 29th birthday. Alex died alone on the floor of his locked bathroom, trying to hide his addiction. His death left a hole in his family, as his mother Annie lost her only son and as eight-year-old Bella lost her father.

Equally tragic is the story of Clint who was a kind and successful young man who had a loving family and was just about to move in with his girlfriend. Clint had managed to score his dream job and went out with his friend to celebrate. His friend brought cocaine, which Clint had never used before, but because he was celebrating, he decided to take some. Later that night, he died. It turned out that the cocaine had been cut with fentanyl, and Clint overdosed on a drug he did not even know he was taking.

The loss of Alex and Clint are unimaginable tragedies, passing in the prime of their lives, leaving behind loving families and promising futures, but these stories are all too common in British Columbia, where it is hard to find someone who is more than a couple of degrees removed from such a tragedy.

Since the loss of her son, Annie has been driven to make sure that others do not go through the same thing that she and her family have been through. Through her work with Moms Stop The Harm, she is fighting to make sure that we end the stigma around addiction and ensure that those who need it can get help and do not take tainted drugs.

I want to thank Annie and Clint's father Al for their advocacy and tell them that we are listening, but we have more work to do so that those who are struggling with addiction can get the help they need.

When simple drug use no longer needs to be concealed out of fear of criminal prosecution, government programs that provide for safer supply will be possible, and we can create the space for treatment to rehabilitate those who are suffering from addiction.

This method has shown success in communities across my riding and has overwhelming community support. In February 2021, an overdose prevention site opened in Squamish. In Sechelt, the Sunshine Coast's first sanctioned safe consumption site was established in July of 2020. There, trained staff provides support, which includes access to naloxone, counselling, overdose response and education, drug-checking and detox treatment options. These facilities work, as despite record-high opioid deaths, not a single person has died under a supervised consumption or overdose prevention site in B.C.

We need to support these sites that keep people safe, particularly in communities where indigenous people are disproportionately impacted by the opioid crisis. We need to build on the $200-million investment in substance use prevention and treatment services for first nations and the $116-million investment through budget 2021 to fund projects through the substance use and addictions program, but we also need to ensure that those who are suffering from addiction are able to get the help they need without fearing prosecution. Addiction must be recognized for the health issue that it is and not be treated as a criminal issue.

Our government has proposed taking steps in this direction with Bill C-5, which would require police and prosecutors to first consider diverting people to treatment programs and support services instead of charging and prosecuting them.

Preventing avoidable deaths needs to be the fundamental priority for our country. This starts with safe supply projects, including overdose prevention clinics and the financial tools with the substance use and addictions program. We have to work with jurisdictions when they are ready, but we also need to work directly with physicians to give them the tools they need to prescribe life-saving alternatives.

We will continue to work towards ending this crisis so that nobody else has to suffer the loss that the families of Alex and Clint have endured.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Madam Chair, I will say two things. I worked closely with the president of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, Bryan Larkin, to ensure that a bill I introduced in the House had their support. By the way, that bill is now part of Bill C-5, and that bill has their support.

Regardless of new spending, that bill will have the support of the chiefs of police, and I hope it has the support of my Conservative colleagues. It is my genuine hope that we rally across parties in the House and we do the right thing.

Of course we need more money to expand treatment options. I would say I actually do not want police to be the first responders for what is fundamentally a mental health crisis in an individual's life. I do not think that is the appropriate response. I think Portugal is probably too coercive, and Bill C-5 is probably too coercive in that way. We should get police focusing on criminals, not focusing on people suffering from mental health problems.

Ideally, that is the answer. To the member's point, we absolutely need much more significant funding to expand treatment options. That is an area I think we could work together on.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, Minister of Mental Health and Addictions and Associate Minister of Health]

moved:

That this committee take note of the opioid crisis in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Yukon.

I join you today from the traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the Credit, where we honour all indigenous peoples who paddled these waters and whose moccasins walked this land.

I want to begin by thanking the member for Yukon for his unbelievable hard work and dedication, both as Yukon's former chief medical officer of health and now as its member of Parliament, to end the toxic drug supply and opioid overdose crisis in Canada. I would also like to thank him for advocating so strongly for this important national debate to take place here in the House of Commons.

Our hearts go out to all the loved ones in communities of those we have lost to the worsening toxic drug supply and to opioid overdoses. For decades, effective drug policy has had four pillars: prevention, harm reduction, treatment and enforcement. Unfortunately, progress on harm reduction has met significant obstacles based upon ideology and not evidence.

Our government is working with provinces, territories and communities to develop a comprehensive, evidence-based strategy to address this ongoing tragedy. Over 20 years ago, Insite, the first safe consumption site, opened in Vancouver. It continues to save lives. The evidence is clear. Harm reduction measures save lives.

Since 2017, supervised consumption sites across Canada have reversed 27,000 overdoses without a single death on-site. Communities across Canada now have increased access to lifesaving naloxone, including remote and isolated indigenous communities. Our government will use every tool at our disposal to end this national public health crisis.

People are dying from toxic substances in the drug supply, and we will not turn the tide of the growing death toll until we address that reality. The pandemic has led to an even more uncertain and dangerous illegal drug supply, resulting in significant increases in overdose-related deaths. The provision of a safer supply of drugs is essential to help prevent overdoses, and it is a vital part of our comprehensive approach to the opioid overdose crisis.

Our government has invested over $60 million to expand access to a safe supply of prescription opioids. We also need to divert people who use drugs away from the criminal justice system and toward supportive and trusted relationships in the health system.

The Public Prosecution Service of Canada has issued guidance stating that alternatives to prosecution should be considered for simple possession offences. My colleague, the Minister of Justice, has also introduced Bill C-5 to get rid of the previous government's failed policies, which filled our prisons with low-risk first-time offenders who needed help, not to be put in jail.

This legislation would provide further space to treat simple drug possession as a health issue. Health Canada is also currently reviewing several requests from Vancouver, British Columbia, and Toronto Public Health for section 56 exemptions under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to decriminalize the personal possession of drugs.

We are working closely with our provincial, territorial and municipal partners and with other key stakeholders such as the impressive network Moms Stop the Harm, with more than $700 million to reduce the risks, save lives and give people the evidence-based support they need.

Canadians can rest assured that fighting the opioid crisis remains a priority for this government. We will continue to do everything possible to save lives and put an end to this public health crisis.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank all the witnesses for being here today. We have a really interesting diversity of witnesses. We have our keystone province police in Winnipeg on the ground with 40 years of experience, and then we have this very unique situation on the border.

I didn't realize that Akwesasne borders Ontario, Quebec and the United States. I knew it bordered the U.S. and Canada, but I didn't realize there was an interprovincial border there as well. I can't imagine all the red tape and bureaucracy you have to go through just to make your community safer. I look forward to asking you some questions.

I am going to start off with the Winnipeg Police Association.

President Sabourin, thank you very much for being here. I appreciate your opening remarks. Recently we spoke and talked about this committee and gun violence, gang violence, and I also brought to your attention Bill C-5, which was brought forward. I'd appreciate your thoughts on Bill C-5 as well. When we last spoke, you mentioned that in Winnipeg—which we know is one of the most dangerous violent crime capitals in Canada, unfortunately—calls for service increased 45% in the last 10 years, and violent and property crimes are up. In fact, you mentioned to me that the crime severity index for Statistics Canada had to increase their scale for Manitoba. I believe we went above 150, and 161 was our crime scale. We know very much what it's like on the ground in Winnipeg, and our hearts go out to those in Montreal who are experiencing a lot of that same violent crime.

You mentioned that meth and drugs are part of that. You also mentioned that you believe it may be the result of having the lowest incarceration rates in 20 years, because so many factors play into this. Can you explain to the committee your perspective on that and how you believe incarceration and violent crime are connected?

[Maurice Sabourin, President, Winnipeg Police Association]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the rest of the committee for the invite to speak at this committee level.

My name is Maurice Sabourin. I am the president of the Winnipeg Police Association. I have been so for the past eight years. I have been a proud police officer with the Winnipeg Police Service for the last 32 years, with experience in our property crimes division as a detective, our major crimes unit, stolen auto unit and our homicide unit. I have served with our association for the past 14 years and, as I previously mentioned, as president for the last eight.

Joining me today is Detective Phil Neyron, who is also a director with the Winnipeg Police Association. I felt that it was necessary to draw upon his experience. He is a detective within our guns and gangs unit, which is appropriate for the topic today. He is a police officer of 20 years.

Once again, I appreciate the opportunity to weigh in on the topic today, Bill C-5, which I believe is very well intentioned, when you take into account public safety, gangs and the smuggling of guns. I do have some concerns about Bill C-5, as it possibly does not take into account the possibilities that could flow from this bill.

Public safety for us, in particular, is paramount. I think we are arguably one of the most violent jurisdictions in the country, and I would say probably the busiest per capita per police officer, even though we are at the top of the heap in terms of the number of police officers per 100,000 citizens. Gun violence is a daily occurrence in Winnipeg. Anything we can do to weigh in on helping solve this problem is much appreciated.

With the introduction of Bill C-5 and the proposal to remove minimum sentencing, I fear that's going to have a negative effect on public safety here in Winnipeg. As a member of our property crimes unit and our stolen auto unit, I saw the benefits of intensive supervision as well as incarceration and members of the criminal element being placed in incarceration and in remand.

The other negative effect that we have already seen is the potential for the purchase back of illegal firearms. What we are seeing on the street nowadays is as a result of that proposal. The cost of illegal firearms has doubled, which creates more of an opportunity for gun smugglers. When the possibility of a 300% profit over a 100% profit is an opportunity, people are willing to take more risk in smuggling firearms.

In addition, the firearms registry, obviously, has its pros and cons. The pro would be that there should be a better tracking of firearms when it comes to purchase and resale. That is beneficial. Unfortunately, the legislation could use some bolstering in that area. I think for the majority of the offences that are being committed on the street, it's not the legal gun owners who are committing these offences, and the majority of the firearms that are being seized are not legally registered. Winnipeg, in particular, is seizing pretty much the same number of firearms that are being seized in Toronto.

I'm more than happy to expand on any of the statements I have made, but that brings my opening statement to a close.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Recently, the Liberal government brought forward Bill C-5, which addresses, as you mentioned, mandatory minimum sentences. For those who don't know what that means, a mandatory minimum means that if you commit X crime you go to jail for a minimum of x amount of years or days or months. That's what a mandatory minimum sentence is, from my understanding.

So you're saying that you're already right now, without this Bill C-5, which will eliminate mandatory minimum prison time for extortion with a firearm, robbery with a firearm, firing a firearm that tends to injure someone.... It eliminates mandatory minimums for those crimes. You're saying that even without the elimination of those mandatory minimums with gun crimes, the RCMP are seeing now a revolving door; violent crime is committed Friday, like you said, and they're back out on the street committing crimes two days later.

Justice

[Alex Ruff, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I had the privilege of speaking to students in a grade 10 civics class this morning in my riding of Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound. I asked for their feedback on Bill C-5.

They would like to know if the government is willing to amend the bill and keep mandatory minimums for extortion with a firearm; importing, exporting or possession of drugs for the purpose of exporting; and the production of hard drugs; that is heroin, cocaine, fentanyl and crystal meth. In their opinion, these serious crimes make sense with mandatory minimums.

If these kids get it, why does the government not get it?

Government Business No. 4—An Act to Provide Further Support in Response to COVID-19

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Madam Speaker, when we look at how we treat addiction and mental health, we have to change how we talk about it. We have to see it as the disease that it is. Consumption treatment sites absolutely are important when we look at harm reduction, but the bigger, long-term sustainable solution is treatment and intervention. We need to focus on that.

Right now we have a situation in our community of Peterborough—Kawartha where the criminals who are dealing these drugs that are killing people are being put back out on the streets. Things like Bill C-5 are not helping with that. We need legislation that actually deals with this issue, to make sure the people who are dealing these drugs are held accountable.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I will pick up where I left off earlier. The minister said that some 74 weapons had been seized by the RCMP. That is good, but it is not enough. Some 700 weapons were seized by Montreal police last year. And, again according to TVA Nouvelles, there are almost as many guns coming across the border per week as police across Canada seize in a year.

What we understand from the minister's comments is that current gun control measures are adequate, but more are needed. However, according to journalistic investigations, these measures are clearly not sufficient and are therefore not adequate. We need a change of direction. In Montreal right now, an American-style gun culture is taking hold. People are thinking of getting a gun to protect themselves and their children and they are obviously getting their guns illegally. In Montreal, young people are dying in libraries or on the street, in broad daylight or when it's not very late at night. Yet, the only measure adopted so far by the government has been to introduce Bill C‑5, which provides for the elimination of mandatory minimum sentences for firearms-related crimes. We're calling for something a little more serious to control guns and stop their illegal trafficking.

Does the minister have a plan? In the coming months, what does his government intend to do concretely to fight against firearms trafficking?