Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I appreciate what Mr. Easter is proposing, but on the one hand they're opposing a bill based on what they continue to purport to Canadians is free and clear access of firearms in the country. We've heard over and over again from our witnesses about how some of the questions they've put are completely misleading.
This isn't about provincial fairness in any respect. The constituents in Yukon who want to transport their firearms out of Yukon to anywhere other than Alaska need to get the appropriate licences to enter British Columbia and then take it to a point of entry in British Columbia. If they want to exit the country through a point of entry in Alberta, they would need one from the Province of B.C. and then the Province of Alberta in order to get it out of the country and into the United States that way.
There is no owned advantage by any province in this bill. It's not putting any other province at a disadvantage by having to get licences to do interprovincial transport, save for the piece where you happen to be living on a particular point of entry with a particular state in the United States. So in that vein I could argue that Yukoners don't have the same access to the United States or the same rights as Ontarians, because they can enter different states in the U.S.
I think if we start using that line of argument for interprovincial transport for equal and unfettered access to all points of entry in the United States, what we would run into is a lot of cross-country mobility and some very confusing amendments and additions to firearms paperwork that would only increase the burden and the red tape that we're trying to avoid in the first place.