Evidence of meeting #112 for Public Safety and National Security in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was firearm.
A video is available from Parliament.
12:45 p.m.
Director General, Policing Policy, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Sorry, my colleague has a small addition, if she may.
12:45 p.m.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
This is also a proposed amendment in the bill which would clarify that when an individual is issued a prohibition order, which prevents them from owning or possessing firearms or other weapons, that any firearm that is currently in the possession of the police, for example, is subject to a bail condition. The police would have seized those firearms or seized them on public safety grounds.
This amendment would clarify that these firearms would also be forfeited to the crown because currently an Ontario Court of Appeal decision in 2012 interpreted section 115 of the Criminal Code to mean that firearms in the possession of the person are forfeited to the crown. The Ontario Court of Appeal interpreted that section to mean that firearms in the possession of the police at the time that the prohibition order is issued are not forfeited to the crown.
This has created a situation whereby these firearms in the possession of the police have to be retained by the police until the end of the prohibition order and at that time they may either be returned to the person, that owner, or sold to another licensed individual. A number of these firearms include firearms related to gang activity. I have had anecdotal conversations with prosecutors who were very frustrated that these firearms would be returned and put back into circulation.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Instead of their being retained by the crown they are getting back into circulation to gangs and to criminals. Is that what you're saying?
12:45 p.m.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that they could be transferred to a licensed individual, but they can't be forfeited anymore. Normally, in the course of forfeiture, they are destroyed.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Just to clarify, when you say that they could be transferred to a licensed individual, that could be a family member.
12:45 p.m.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
That could be a family member.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
I'll go back to the case that I was mentioning earlier. When you're dealing with domestic abuse, if the person who is the abuser has firearms and they're confiscated, they actually could go to that person's brother—
12:45 p.m.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
—but the abuser would still be prohibited from owning or possessing that firearm. If the abuser breached that, the abuser would be subject to a criminal—
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
But that doesn't help a woman who is killed by her abuser who happens to get a hold of the gun, though. I'm just saying that it's fine that it's prohibited, but the fact is that this is what ends up happening.
12:45 p.m.
Director General, Policing Policy, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Bill C-71 will close that loophole.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to thank the officials for being here. They've been here for the whole time. The minister has now left, but in response to the questions I asked previously, the minister indicated that one of the purposes and motives of Bill C-71 is the ability for the government, or the police, or law enforcement agencies to trace a firearm back to its original owner, whereupon I basically said that means there has to be a registry because we're not going to run a query against the wind. I mean, it has to be information that's kept some place. You can call it a repository. You can call it a registry. You can call it whatever you want. There's a repository of information that's transaction-based.
The minister was very clear that the purpose behind that was in order to trace that. However, Mr. O'Reilly, you just suggested to this committee that in a person-to-person transaction—so if I were to sell my firearm to Mr. Fraser over there—none of the information with regard to the firearm will actually be kept, only the reference number.
If that's the case—
12:45 p.m.
Director, Firearms Regulatory Services, Canadian Firearms Program, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Sorry, the reference number and the two licence numbers associated would be.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
If that's the case, if what you're telling me is true, then what the minister told this committee is not true, because that query would not provide any information insofar as to trace a firearm because a reference number is not actually stored anywhere on a firearm. If it was stolen from my house, the reference number is not stolen; the firearm is. The make, model, and serial number associated to it would be known. My firearms licence isn't being stolen. Well, we would hope that it wouldn't be, but of course, there is a repository with that information.
If that's the case, Mr. O'Reilly, why would the minister suggest that the traceability of firearms is going to be one of the premises for which this bill should pass, and yet you're saying that the information about a firearm is not even being stored?
12:50 p.m.
Director, Firearms Regulatory Services, Canadian Firearms Program, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
I can't speak for the minister, but perhaps I can speak to the notion of chain of custody, which is linked to this.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
12:50 p.m.
Director, Firearms Regulatory Services, Canadian Firearms Program, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
The reason I would like to say that is that the chain of custody links to the notion of the reference number. If businesses are required to keep records around a firearm, which includes the reference number, and law enforcement has reason to believe that the firearm went through that business—
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
But the example I gave you was a person-to-person transaction between me and Mr. Fraser.
12:50 p.m.
Director, Firearms Regulatory Services, Canadian Firearms Program, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
I agree, but the firearm that got to that individual likely originated with a firearms retailer, so the firearms retailer would be recording the reference number of that first point of sale out of the business. There would be a reference number attached to it.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Do you honestly believe that, Mr. O'Reilly? Do you honestly believe that every firearm that goes through one of these transactions is going to.... I mean, there are firearms in this country that are 50, 60, 70 years old. A firearm never really goes out of date. We don't even know how many of the original firearms were actually put in the failed long-gun registry going back a long time.
I appreciate where you're going with that, but I think it's a bit of a stretch. I don't know how many firearms will get caught up—
12:50 p.m.
Director, Firearms Regulatory Services, Canadian Firearms Program, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
I would just clarify that it's just new firearms going through firearms inventories that would be—
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Which is not all the firearms in Canada. You and I would both agree on that.
12:50 p.m.
Director, Firearms Regulatory Services, Canadian Firearms Program, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
That's right.
