Public Safety Committee on April 23rd, 2015

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

I'm making some assumptions that it's pretty widely available across the country and through the provinces and territories.

[Kathy Thompson]

The training is widely available across the country in provinces and territories. In addition, my understanding is that some of the Canadian firearms officers in those areas actually travel to some remote communities to offer the training as well.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Do we have any kind of indication of what the costs of those courses are?

[Kathy Thompson]

The costs vary, and they're established by the chief firearms officer in every province, but generally they're approximately $80 to $100 or so per course, I would say it's to a maximum of about $300 for the basic safety course and also the restricted safety course for a restricted firearm. So it can total up to $300, but it does vary slightly by province and territory.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

So it's not overly burdensome if, in fact, you happen to own firearms or want to purchase firearms because, obviously, the firearms cost a heck a lot more than $300.

Another important aspect, I think, is that a lot of people think you can just buy one of these things without any kind of background check. I wonder if somebody could give me some details on what the procedures are if an individual wants to buy a firearm, and what actions happen through safety and certainly through police interventions.

[Kathy Thompson]

In Canada, under the Firearms Act, to legally and lawfully own a firearm you must possess a licence. There are two types of licences that are available in Canada. One is a possession only licence, which is only available to individuals who are grandfathered, who owned a firearm at the time that the Firearms Act came into force in 1998. The other is a possession and acquisition licence, which is available only to those who are now applying for a licence. That is obviously, as stated, a licence to possess, but also to acquire, firearms and ammunition.

In order to apply for a licence, you must first apply to the chief firearms officer in your province or territory, and you must fill out an application. It's a very comprehensive application with mandatory fields that must be completed, including all of your tombstone information. As well, it requests information on criminal history, mental health, substance abuse and any past violent behaviour. You must provide two references. You must provide a certified photograph. You must also provide references and attestations from current and former spouses, as well as the signed guarantor photograph.

Then, there is a mandatory check that is completed by the chief firearms officer. They check that against CPIC. It's not only for convictions. Anyone who is on parole or probation, with any prohibition orders, or any reported incidents, as well as charges, would be picked up through that check.

The chief firearms officer may also conduct an open source search on the Internet, interview the references, the spouse, the former spouse, and request further information, including asking the licence applicant for permission to contact the doctor, for example, if the individual indicated there has a history of mental health related violence. Very importantly, mental health histories where violence was involved, threatened, or attempted against a person are the only instances were mental health would be a relevant factor.

If any of those red flags come up, either through the questionnaire or through the comprehensive background check, the CFO can undertake further work on completing the background check. That's the licence portion of obtaining the licence.

The individual who has the licence then has to go through a process to acquire a firearm.

In Canada, there are four purposes for which you can acquire a firearm. The first purpose is to protect your life or the life of an individual, which is provided for in very rare instances. Another purpose is for employment, for example, Brink's Security guards. We'll set those two aside. For our purposes today, there are two additional purposes for which you can acquire a firearm. One is for the purpose of going to a shooting range or participating in competitions. The other is for a gun collection.

Once again, you go through a process with the chief firearms officer to ensure that you have a valid licence and that you can acquire those privileges. It's a separate process that takes approximately 30 days.

In the past, there was an additional separate touch point with the chief firearms officer for authorization to transport, which we are now proposing to streamline as part of the licensing process, because it's generally the same check that the CFO was doing. We're going to attach those conditions to a licence; that is the proposal.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Fine, thank you.

Mr. Payne, your time is up. I'm so sorry, sir. It went by fast. I know.

We will now go to, Madame Doré Lefebvre for seven minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I thank the witnesses for having stayed for the second hour in order to discuss Bill C-42.

With your permission, I'd like to go back to a question I put to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness concerning the consultations.

The minister mentioned that he had consulted the various police services in first nations communities about his Bill C-42.

Ms. Thompson, perhaps you could shed more light on this for me. Was there an official consultation process that fed into the preparation of Bill C-42?

[Kathy Thompson]

The consultation process was led by the minister, who held round tables with the police services, representatives of aboriginal communities and other representatives. For our part, we held consultations with the federal government, the Department of Justice, the RCMP and other bodies.

On other occasions we discussed elements of the bill, for instance the provision concerning the exchange of information between the RCMP and the Canada Border Services Agency. The measure was proposed several years ago by law enforcement organisations. They had pointed out to us that there was a danger that firearms find their way onto the black market for illicit purposes.

We sit on various committees with police organizations. We discussed different points at various times with police organizations, and others.

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

I see. This leads me to my next question.

I know that groups from all fields have expressed some criticisms regarding Bill C-42. The Canadian Firearms Association, for instance, objected to a few things in the bill. These points mostly had to do with the mandatory training as regards first nations communities, or rural and remote communities. I understand some of these concerns.

In practice some of the measures in Bill C-42 would prevent some people who have received other training from obtaining a permit without having followed the course prescribed in the bill. I understand the purpose of mandatory training, as well as the realities of northern and first nations communities. They may have other training offered there or they may consider firearms in a different way than does the population in urban centres.

I am curious to see how all of this will play out. Will we force people in remote areas to travel at their own expense—perhaps not to large urban centres, but elsewhere—to take the training? Are we going to fund access to training courses provided on location more frequently than we do now? Has anyone thought about how things will unfold after Bill C-42 passes? According to the provisions in the bill, the course will be mandatory for everyone no matter where they live. Is the government going to fund the courses? Where are we headed with this?

[Kathy Thompson]

Thank you for your question.

First, I would like to reply to the point concerning aboriginal persons. The Aboriginal Peoples of Canada Adaptations Regulations regarding firearms gives aboriginal persons a solution regarding certification and training. It provides another process for those who cannot go to follow the training course because they live in a northern community, for instance. For cost or availability reasons, aboriginal persons may follow another process.

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

I do not know this process very well. What is it exactly?

[Kathy Thompson]

The process allows people who are part of an aboriginal community to obtain their certification in a different way. They do not necessarily have to travel to take the course if an elder, a responsible person in their community, can confirm that they have the necessary knowledge to use a firearm safely.

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

Very well.

As for people who are not members of a first nations community but live in a remote or rural area, will they have to travel?

[Kathy Thompson]

Yes, they are going to have to take the mandatory training. It is not always necessary for them to travel. As I said earlier, sometimes a province or a territory offers the training in northern communities, once or twice a year. Arrangements can be made. The application of the bill will surely allow us to examine these things.

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

In his presentation, the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness mentioned the possibility of taking firearms from people charged with conjugal violence, if I understood correctly.

In Quebec, whenever the police receive a call relating to violence in general or to conjugal violence, and see that a person has firearms at home, these firearms are taken from him until the case has been cleared up, even if no charge has been laid.

Is Quebec the only province where things are done that way? What Bill C-42 contains concerning conjugal violence already exists in Quebec. I would even say that police services go even further in that regard. Will all of provinces do the same thing? What will be the impact of Bill C-42?

[Julie Besner, Acting Senior Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice]

The Criminal Code contains other powers that authorize peace officers to seize firearms if they are concerned about the safety of someone in a home. This can be done in the context of an investigation or when someone is released temporarily from custody after a bail hearing. There is also another provision in section 111 of the Criminal Code that allows a police officer to submit a request to the court if he or she is concerned about someone's safety. This leads to a temporary prohibition. It does not only apply in cases where people are found guilty at the very end of the process. There are in fact certain preventive measures in the Criminal Code.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you very much, Ms. Doré Lefebvre.

Before we have Mr. Wilks, I will take a couple of seconds to eat into his time and acknowledge the presence here of the member for Yorkton—Melville. I know that he has been concerned about and paid attention for many years to the issue of public safety and gun safety, so we thank you for your attendance even though you're not participating today.

[Garry Breitkreuz, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

We will now go to Mr. Wilks for the balance of that time.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the witnesses for being here today.

The possession only licence, POL, which allows no new firearm acquisition privileges, is currently issued to persons who do not intend to acquire any new firearms and who lawfully possessed a firearm when the Firearms Act came into force. These individuals are not required to pass a safety training course and testing requirements. The apparent rationale underlying the creation of the possession only licences was that individuals who had been in lawful possession of firearms for a significant period of time, and who were not seeking to acquire additional firearms, had demonstrated a history of safe and responsible firearm ownership with the only firearm they would continue to be allowed to possess under the non-acquisition licence.

Could you explain to us why possession only firearm licences are being eliminated and will the individuals who currently hold possession only licences automatically qualify for firearm licences under the new regime?

[Kathy Thompson]

Thank you for the question, Mr. Chairman.

Both the possession only licence and the possession acquisition licence were created for the Firearms Act, when it came into force in 1998, after receiving royal assent in 1995. At the time, a number of firearm owners were already in possession of firearms and it was a way to grandfather those current firearm owners who were very experienced. The average age of a POL—possession only licence holder—is 60, so they are very experienced firearm owners who have owned firearms for many years. They had their privileges grandfathered. Over time, we had expected and we are seeing fewer and fewer POL holders, and so we are streamlining the licensing regime to combine those licences into one, the possession acquisition licence. That is the only licence that will be available to new firearm owners. Those who possessed a POL and are being converted to a PAL will have acquisition rights as was the case when the act came into force. They will not be required to take the firearm safety course since, as we said, they are currently very experienced firearm owners.

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

Thank you.

Moving to the ATTs, the bill provides for automatic authorization to transport prohibited and restricted firearms within the licence holder's province of residence upon licence renewal for several purposes. Will the transportation requirements for firearms be affected by this change? Second, given that firearms licence holders will no longer be required to apply for authorization to transport for the purposes specified in Bill C-42, will the number of background checks conducted on firearm licence holders be reduced. Third, might the facilitation of firearms transportation increase the incidence of theft of firearms?

[Kathy Thompson]

Mr. Chairman, could I just confirm the three questions? The second one was, will checks be reduced? The first question again?

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

Will the transportation requirements for firearms be affected by this change?