Public Safety Committee on April 28th, 2015

[Heidi Rathjen]

I have not been made aware of their concerns. But one thing is sure, by loosening the safeguards around restricted firearms—and the current government has admitted that these are dangerous weapons—we are increasing the risk of their falling into the wrong hands, and the risk that they could be used impulsively.

In the United States, road rage often ends with shots being fired rather than punches being exchanged. By allowing the transportation of restricted weapons between thousands of places—shooting clubs, firing ranges and police stations, amongst other places—there is no doubt that, regardless of where you are with your handgun, you might be between your home and one of these other places.

Lastly, under Bill C-42, handgun owners, who have them for very specific purposes, for instance to go to a shooting club, to a firing range or to a gunsmith to get them fixed, will be able to transport them anywhere.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you very much, Ms. Rathjen. We're well over time. I'm very sorry.

Mr. Falk, you have seven minutes.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank our witnesses for coming to committee this morning and for testifying to this common-sense firearms legislation that's before us in the form of Bill C-42.

Some of the testimony provided by Ms. Rathjen and Mr. Laganière seem to be very extreme. You talk about United States statistics at gun shows. You talk about road rage, yet you don't talk about the issue at hand, which is Bill C-42. That's really what we're here to discuss.

Mr. Laganière, you made a comment in your testimony that said this legislation will make it easier to access firearms. What in the legislation do you see will make it easier to access firearms?

[Heidi Rathjen]

Would you like me to answer?

[Benoît Laganière]

Yes, go ahead.

[Heidi Rathjen]

It's by weakening controls on a number of levels.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Actually, I put the question to Mr. Laganière.

He made the comment that it was—

[Benoît Laganière]

The comment I made was a joint one. I am a simple citizen who witnessed a massacre.

Given the speed at which Conservatives table bills that change existing laws, it's difficult to...

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Could you please answer the question? What in this legislation do you see will make it easier to access firearms?

It's a very simple question.

[Heidi Rathjen]

Do you want me to answer?

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

I don't think there is an answer because there is nothing in this legislation that will make it easier.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

On a point of order, we have Mr. Easter.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Chair, the two witnesses are before us as a group. They should be able to decide who answers the question rather than be berated by members of Parliament for not having done so.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

The question is asked of a witness and the questioner has an opportunity to listen. If there's no response, the questioner can go on to another question.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

I'll go on to a different question.

Mr. Latraverse, part of this legislation, Bill C-42, merges a possession-only licence together with the possession and acquisition licence.

Can you speak to how you see that as being a positive or a negative?

[Pierre Latraverse]

It's a very positive measure, given that there will only be a single licence under these conditions. This is much more representative of what owning a firearm is like. Currently, there are two licences: a possession licence and a possession and acquisition licence. If you only have a possession licence, you cannot purchase firearms. You have to go back through the system to buy a possession and acquisition licence.

With the merger, a hunter won't have to go through the whole administrative process again to purchase another firearm. You absolutely need a possession licence before you can buy a gun. To us, the merger of these two licences is critical. It greatly simplifies gun ownership. Say you decided years ago to own a single gun, but since then you've developed a passion for another type of hunting that requires a different firearm, then you have to go through the whole process again to purchase a firearm, even though you were a model citizen.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

I appreciate that clarification. I think there's another aspect.

In the first hour of testimony today at committee, we heard Ms. Cukier, who represented the gun control group, state that the possession-only licence didn't require the same amount of rigour and screening as a possession and acquisition licence, and that merging those two licences will actually make sure that going forward, anybody who wants to get a firearms licence undertakes the full rigour, the full screening, that is currently in the possession and acquisition licensing.

Would that be accurate?

[Pierre Latraverse]

As pertains to the merger of the two licences, the RCMP will do the screening, which remains the same. The process will be the same as for a new gun owner. You'll have to take the new Canadian Firearms Safety Course. Once you complete that course and pass the introductory course on hunting with a firearm, you can apply for a gun licence. New gun owners will have to do all that.

In our view, this is a valid way to licence. The RCMP undertakes a thorough investigation of the individual's record. He or she must answer a bunch of very personal questions. Once the information is registered, sent to the RCMP and analyzed, the individual receives a licence that allows him or her to purchase a firearm to practice their favourite sport. In our case, it will involve wildlife and hunting activities. The courses, along with all the thorough questions, are very important to us. We are in favour of the gun licence and the merger of these two licences. Indeed, it would simplify the life of those who wish to practice a healthy activity that benefits all of society.

However, the same does not apply to restricted firearms, an issue I won't dive into here. Restricted firearms are the jurisdiction of gun ranges and shooting federations, not of hunting and fishing associations. Our interest is in hunting and wildlife activities. You should properly apply for a licence after having followed courses. Those who practice these activities are responsible citizens.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Falk. We have completed now.

Mr. Easter, please.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Thank you to the witnesses.

Just coming off Mr. Falk's question, Mr. Chair, can any of the witnesses answer? On the combining of the licence and where a person currently has a possession-only licence, Mr. Latraverse indicated the word “new”. People coming in to get a licence would have to go through the screening, etc.

What about the ones who already have a possession-only licence? Are they grandfathered in? Do they have to take the screening? Is there a police check on those, because this is going to give them new authorization to buy ammunition, buy new guns, etc.? Are they grandfathered in, or do they have to meet the additional requirements that regular licences require? Does anybody know?

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

First, Ms. Rathjen.

[Heidi Rathjen]

Well, I think the whole point of merging the possession-only licences with the possession and acquisition licences is to exempt the half a million gun owners who have not gone through screening to get an acquisition licence. It allows them to acquire new guns without going through that process; otherwise,they would just go through the process and get an acquisition licence because that's what you have to do as a gun owner if you want to buy guns.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Yes, I do think there are a couple of interpretations on that, and maybe we can ask our researchers if they could check that one out. I honestly don't know the answer.

I was going to raise a point of order earlier, Mr. Chair, but I'll take it out of my own time because it's really a question to the clerk. Does the clerk know if there are any police associations coming forward? I know we've asked three and they've all declined.

Given the concern around both the transportation and the reclassification of guns, it's absolutely essential that we hear from some police associations. Does the clerk know if there are any on the list as of yet?

[The Clerk]

There has been correspondence today that I haven't had a chance to review because I'm here with the members in committee, but I'll be sure to update all members on this information as soon as possible after today's meeting.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

We have one space open, but every police association we've asked to date has declined, and that concerns me because I do think we need to hear from them, especially relative to transportation and reclassification. I would hope we don't have to subpoena someone from a police association to come.

I want to come back to you, Ms. Rathjen. I certainly do respect your right, while we're discussing Bill C-42, to lay out your arguments on the cumulative effect of changes to gun laws by previous legislative changes, and in fact, changes to regulations. My question goes to regulations because you have indicated a couple that seem to increase the risk to public safety as it relates to gun shows.

Do you have a list of those regulatory changes that have been made over the past two or three years that you can provide to the committee?