Public Safety Committee on May 12th, 2015

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

Yes, of course, as chair of the Conservative hunting and angling caucus, I consulted with a number of groups across the country, and I will freely admit to you that consultations can go on forever.

The strong support we're getting from the people I spoke to tells me there is strong support in the outdoors community in Quebec and indeed across the country.

Going back to the points you raised about Quebec, I was in Quebec last week speaking with hunters and anglers groups, and I can tell you categorically they are very strongly supportive of what our government is doing.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Unfortunately, I have still not received an answer to my specific question. You are telling me about groups you have had discussions with retroactively—after your bill was introduced—but I still don't know which groups you consulted in Quebec in particular. That is the crux of my question. Whom did you consult in Quebec while you were preparing your bill? I will start by trying to get an answer for one province.

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

As I said, I met with Pierre Latraverse, Guy Vezina, and other groups from Quebec, and they strongly support the entire agenda of our government in terms of protecting and defending the outdoor way of life. As I said, Madam Michaud, I'm only beginning to appreciate how passionate Quebeckers are about the outdoor way of life, and it has been a very great pleasure of mine to be speaking with them.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you.

Listen, I am—

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Very briefly, Madam Michaud.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

I'm fairly puzzled by the reasons for which you introduced this bill. On the one hand, you are telling us that this is the government's program, and on the other hand, you defend yourself by saying that this is a private member's bill. You say that you saw a problematic situation. Unfortunately, I have still not heard any evidence in your presentation to indicate that this bill had to be introduced.

How much time do I have left, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

You're well over time now, I'm so sorry.

Thank you very much.

We will now go to Mr. Payne, please.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Thanks, Bob, for coming.

I'm pleased to be a member of the hunting and angling caucus as well. You talked about BB guns. I go back to when I was a young lad and I got my BB gun, and the first thing I was taught was safety. That carried through. As I got a little bit older—I was about 14 as I recall—I actually got my first .22 and I joined a shooting club and there again I was taught safety. I think that culture had already started. We were taught never to aim it at anybody and make sure that it was never left loaded. Those are the kinds of things that I think parents teach their children, and it's the right thing to do.

On the storage and transportation, just in terms of the paintball guns and trigger locks, we have a huge paintball area just outside of Medicine Hat, and I know there are a lot of people who go there. I'm wondering if you could talk a bit about the use of paintball air guns and also what you see in terms of storing those and the paint pellets.

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

That's not an activity which I've partaken in. Having said that, the example of the paintball guns points to the absurdity of the current situation if this court decision were allowed, if it wasn't amended by my private member's bill. It's clearly ridiculous to have to lock up these devices and store the paintballs in a different place, and trigger locks, the whole nine yards.

Again, for the committee, this is a fairly minor bill. It's a technical amendment to correct a decision by an appellate judge that we think was clearly wrong. The paintball situation, if this was allowed to stand, is the perfect example of why we need my private member's bill.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

We and some of our colleagues have talked about pellet guns, and I'm thinking about going out into the hills and shooting pellet guns. What would people say? What would parents say if in fact their teenagers were convicted of shooting a pellet gun out in the hills? I just find that fairly strange.

Rosane Doré Lefebvre talked about a pellet gun and, I think, taking it out to the cabin or somewhere like that. Certainly, that makes me wonder about the transportation of that particular pellet gun and the pellets. I wonder if you could touch on that a little bit.

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

Again, we're talking about devices that fire projectiles less than 500 feet a second versus high-powered rifles, which are in the 2,000 feet per second round. Of course the latter need to be treated much differently than the former. The use of air guns and pellet guns can teach a young person proper firearms safety so when they graduate as you did, Mr. Payne, to .22s, which can inflict real harm if used improperly.... I think this is the proper process.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Thank you.

Your bill, as you said, is a technical amendment and certainly it falls right in line with our common-sense firearms Bill C-42 and things that we've done, in particular, to get rid of the long-gun registry. I don't know if you have any other comments you'd like to make in that regard.

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

Again, just to go back to something Mr. Easter said regarding prohibited weapons, those still remain prohibited, things like fully automatic weapons and so on. They are prohibited and they will remain prohibited. They're owned by people under very tight supervision and very restricted situations.

There are three classes of firearms in this country: prohibited, restricted, and non-restricted. What I find in debates is that those three categories are often conflated in the heat of debate. People have to realize the differences between the three types of firearms.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Thank you.

I want to touch on the transportation issue.

I know what the Liberal Party has said on the transportation of firearms and these machine guns and everything else going out to your neighbourhood arena.... It just absolutely is false because currently that isn't even allowed. You don't need an ATT. That sits in the drawer of the CFO. I'm just wondering if you have a comment that you'd like to make on that as well.

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

It's the Liberal leader's views where he talked about how high-powered handguns would be commonplace “outside busy places like shopping malls, grocery stores, and sports arenas”. Those are his words; they're not mine. It's clearly over the top, and it's truly unfortunate when I think Bill C-42 strikes the right balance between protecting law-abiding firearms owners and protecting the public's safety.

I'll be quite frank. One of the things we've been criticized on with Bill C-42 is our insistence that new firearms owners take a mandatory firearms course. Challenging the firearms course is not allowed anymore. The firearms groups are somewhat uncomfortable with that, but our view is very strong that new firearms owners should be required to take a test in person. They do it once in their lifetime. It's a day out of their lives, but it's time well spent in terms of learning firearms safety.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you very much.

Colleagues, the chair wants to bring a couple of issues to your attention. Just before we do that though, we will excuse member of Parliament Sopuck. Thank you kindly for your attendance here and for your availability for Q and A.

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

Thank you very much.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Chair, I have a technical question as well. Could the clerk tell us whether we're going to hear from the Department of Public Safety and the Department of Justice on this bill?

[The Clerk of the Committee, Mr. Leif-Erik Aune]

The lists of requested witnesses are at the office, so I couldn't tell you authoritatively, but on behalf of the committee I'll be extending invitations to the priority witnesses, as requested by the parties themselves.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Would it not be natural, Mr. Chair, when we're dealing with a public safety issue, that the department would come in its own right? I wouldn't think they would even need an invitation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Ms. James.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

That's not standard practice. I think Mr. Easter knows that.

I had a private member's bill come through public safety and the departments were not invited and they were not witnesses. We want to hear from outside witnesses on private members' bills. Obviously we have the mover of the bill first, and then we have witnesses from all sides come in.

I think Mr. Easter knows the answer to that question.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Chair, we are the committee that's supposed to be responsible for public safety, and we do the estimates from the department. It seems natural to me that on any piece of legislation that has implications on public safety we would hear from the department.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

I understand your position, Mr. Easter. I would suggest that I've sat on many different committees and every bill could pertain to the ministerial responsibility and ministers do not appear on every bill every time.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

I'm not asking the minister, but the department.