Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We know that time is wasting and that the clock is ticking for the firearms registry. It's obvious. Having said that, this might be our last chance to plead with the majority Conservative government that just because it comes from the opposition doesn't mean that it isn't fundamentally and necessarily good.
In fact, in exactly one week to the day, all the politicians, all the parties combined, will stand up on December 6, with their hands over their hearts and rise up against violence against women and say how appalling it is. Right now, the image I have in my mind as I address you, Conservatives, is of all those victims of the Polytechnique, the people who appeared here. That association has never stopped working, since 1989. The registry became a symbol, and with this symbol some of them managed to divide people. There are some Canadians who are also victims of horrible criminal acts, and then there are hunters and sport shooters. I cannot say it enough.
Instead of trying to find ways to bring everyone together, to find logical solutions, that hold water, that meet the greatest common denominator—and there is one—the amendments that have been presented… On this side of the table, we have people who are in favour of the registry and some who are opposed because we are able to remove the irritants that made some people feel singled out.
We heard some horror stories as if, on this side of the table, we were trying to make criminals out of these people. I won't go back to that. We heard from young people from Dawson College who testified before us. We also heard from people who are working hard with the anti-firearms coalition. Over the many years and through all the different debates and the different bills of all kinds that have been presented in Parliament, they have all learned to watch, knowing that one day we would be in this position where we'd be up against a wall. They all tried to put a little water in their wine when it came to this registry, which costs practically nothing compared to some expenses. In fact, the issue of expenses is certainly not your strongest argument. We need to look at how to get rid of the irritants. That's what counts.
I want to clarify this because it's important. I'll quote from part of the amendment:That Bill C-19, in Clause 31, be amended by adding after line 25 on page 12 the following:“(2) Despite subsection (1), the Minister must, before any of the provisions of this Act comes into force and every two years after any provisions of this Act comes into force, conduct a review, in consultation with experts, of the classification of firearms under…
Personally, I'm not a lover of firearms. I don't know much about them, save for what I've learned through the study of this bill. In fact, I had shivers up my spine when I saw the pictures—a picture's worth a thousand words—of some weapons that will be sold freely. Someone could easily acquire an unlimited number of these long guns without anyone being upset, asking questions or being concerned about the situation.
Just because it comes from the opposition doesn't mean it's fundamentally bad. Open your eyes, open your ears, open your heart if you have heard the cry from some of the groups who testified and some of the individuals who may not necessarily be great fans of the registry, but who can understand that, in a free and democratic society, sometimes certain limits are necessary, while not preventing them from doing what they want to do, such as hunt, sport shoot or collect firearms, and so on.
Unfortunately, this is one of my last speeches on this matter. I would like to tell you what Chief Matthew Torrigan said. He said that you cannot accept our opinion when it serves your purposes, then reject it when it goes against them.
Mr. Harris and I spent hours and hours in the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. We heard these same witnesses, who supported the government, tell you that. These people wanted to be respected for the role they play in society.
These people have been very clear and unequivocal in their remarks here. I think there is a way to accommodate all the elements. This is certainly one of the amendments that will help me to feel a little safer when I leave here. Without it, my belief will be that Canada has just taken several steps backwards and I will have serious doubts as to my safety.