Public Safety Committee on May 8th, 2018

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Ladies and gentlemen, let's call this meeting to order, please.

This is the 112th meeting of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security.

We are welcoming Minister Goodale and his officials here to talk about Bill C-71. This is the commencement of our study on Bill C-71. I was going to award Minister Goodale frequent flyer points for appearing before the committee, but it appears that I would be prematurely awarding those points because the House has just adopted a Wednesday schedule for Thursday. Therefore, our meeting on Thursday between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m. is cancelled and we will have to have some discussion as to how to replace that meeting. We'll do that at the end of this meeting.

Welcome Minister Goodale. We look forward to your remarks and questions.

I'm assuming you'll introduce your officials.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Yes, I will, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you very much and good morning to the committee.

I'm glad to be here as you begin your discussion with respect to Bill C-71, which is legislation that upholds our government's commitment to help protect Canadian communities from gun violence while ensuring fair and reasonable treatment for firearms owners and businesses.

I'm happy to be joined today by Randall Koops, who is director general of policing policy at the Department of Public Safety. Superintendent Paul Brown is the acting director general of the Canadian firearms program within the RCMP. Paula Clarke is from the Department of Justice.

We have no more important responsibility than the protection of Canadian communities, and all the elements of this bill are directly related to public safety. They will better protect Canadians from gun violence, while treating firearms owners fairly and reasonably.

While crime rates in Canada overall have been on the decline, thankfully, for decades, the rate of gun violence has been going up in recent years. Between 2013 and 2016 the number of criminal incidents involving firearms rose by 30%. Gun homicides in that period went up by two-thirds. Intimate partner and gender-based violence involving firearms was up by one-third. Gang-related homicides, most of which involve guns, were up by two-thirds. Break-ins for the purpose of the stealing of firearms were up by 56% between 2013 and 2016, and by a whopping 865% since the year 2008.

The problem is obvious. The bottom line is that we have a problem of increasing gun violence in Canada. It's not a problem we can blame on other countries, because police in British Columbia, Toronto, Calgary, Regina, Ottawa, and other places now confirm that most guns used to commit crimes in Canada are domestically sourced. It's not a problem limited to urban centres. In Atlantic Canada, for example, over half of all gun crimes occur in rural areas, and over 60% of gun crimes in my own province of Saskatchewan happen outside of the major cities.

This is a Canadian problem and it's a Canada-wide problem. We need to tackle it head-on in ways that are effective and focused on public safety outcomes while ensuring the firearms owners and businesses are treated fairly and reasonably.

Bill C-71 accomplishes those objectives.

First, it will enhance background checks for people seeking to acquire firearms. As I noted at second reading, this particular measure was proposed some 15 years ago by former Conservative cabinet minister, James Moore. It does seem to have very broad support.

Right now, when a person applies for a licence, there's a mandatory look back over the immediately preceding five years to see whether they have in that period of time been engaged in any violent behaviour or been treated for a mental illness associated with violence. Bill C-71 will remove that five-year limitation so that a person's entire record will be taken into account. That will help ensure, quite simply, that people with a history of violence do not get guns.

The legislation will also help ensure that people who acquire firearms are actually licensed to own them. Since 2012, all that has been required in this regard at the time of a sale is that the vendor have “no reason to believe” that the purchaser is not licensed. It's a double negative. Vendors often check anyway, but they are not, in fact, required to do so.

That can be a problem, for instance, in the case of a long-time customer of a small firearms shop who recently committed an act of violence and had his licence revoked. The owner of the shop wouldn't particularly know that, but if he's known that particular customer for many years, he just might assume that the licence is still valid and sell him a firearm anyway, in good faith, because he had no reason to believe the contrary.

Bill C-71 will require a quick phone call or online verification before any sale to make sure that the buyer's licence is still valid. That is just common sense. It's the licence that is being verified. There is no reference in this process to any particular firearm.

This bill will also ensure that the classification of firearms is based on public safety and not on politics. Parliament will continue to control the definitions that create the three classes of firearms. Bill C-71 repeals the authority the last government gave itself to overrule the RCMP's application of the law. As with many other laws and regulatory frameworks, the rules will be established by elected officials and then they will be applied by law enforcement.

As part of this change, the two instances where the previous government overruled police experts will be reversed, but we will allow people who have acquired these two types of firearms to be grandfathered in the interest of fairness, because they acted in good faith at the time.

Bill C-71 will also reinstate the requirement to get authorization before transporting restricted and prohibited firearms, with two key exceptions: taking a firearm home after you buy it, and taking it back and forth between your residence and a shooting range. This will help police who encounter someone transporting a prohibited or restricted firearm. It will help the police determine whether it's being transported for a legitimate purpose. Getting authorization is, again, a matter of a simple phone call or logging into an online portal. It should not be an onerous burden.

Finally, this bill will reinstate the rule that was in place from 1979 to 1995, requiring firearms businesses to keep track of their sales. This is something that has been compulsory in the United States since 1968. Most Canadian vendors do it today even though they don't have to. Standardizing this good business practice will help police trace guns used in crimes, detect straw purchasing schemes, and identify trafficking networks.

Critically, the records will be privately owned by the retailer. They will not be accessible to government, but police will be able to gain access for the purposes of a criminal investigation on reasonable grounds and with judicial authorization, as appropriate.

The fact is, the legislation is a direct and practical response to the growing problem of gun violence in Canadian communities and it treats firearms owners and businesses reasonably and fairly. That is why the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police called it “sensible firearms legislation enhancing the tools available" to police “to ensure public safety”.

Mr. Chair, I'm happy to try to respond to the committee's questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Minister Goodale.

Ms. Damoff, you have seven minutes please.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Minister, thank you for joining us today on this very important piece of legislation.

I want to focus my first question on the issue of domestic violence, gender-based violence, and intimate partner violence. We know that not only are firearms used in this case but, more importantly, they're also used as a means to threaten the partner, like holding, in most cases, a woman hostage, because they know that their partner has a firearm. I have personal experience with a good friend whose ex-husband legally owned firearms and used those as a threat for violence to hold her hostage.

Minister, I want to ask you about the background checks. The chief firearms officer has a very prescriptive list of what they look for on background checks. When I've talked to some of the organizations that deal with women who are fleeing abuse, they've asked if it would be possible to add something along the lines of “any other risks associated with violence”, so that when the background check is being done, it's expanded slightly beyond that prescriptive list.

I understand that they've spoken with you about this. What are your thoughts on adding something along those lines?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Ms. Damoff, the debate around firearms and gun violence can sometimes become very divisive. People hold strong points of view, and they argue those points of view aggressively. However, one thing I've noticed in this debate, and particularly on that provision about expanding background checks, is that there seems to be a very broad consensus that cuts across all perspectives and points of view, and indeed across all political parties.

I mentioned in my remarks that the origin of some of this content goes back to James Moore, who was a very prominent member of the former Conservative government. There appears to be broad public support for the notion of strengthening background checks so that ab initio, if someone is applying for a licence and they have a record of violence or mental issues that lead to violence, they can be denied that licence. Whatever people may argue about other provisions in the bill, with that general consensus about background checks we will be able to achieve a process that accomplishes a very important public policy objective.

Perhaps I could ask either Randall Koops or Paul Brown from the firearms centre if they have any specific comments on the questioning that goes into determining the eligibility with respect to a background check.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

I'd like to clarify, because they did feel it could be strengthened somewhat so it would be broadened to include risks associated with violence. I know right now you have to have a criminal record. If there's a record of police visiting a home because of domestic abuse, for example, would that be grounds to turn down a firearm when someone hasn't been convicted of an offence?

[Randall Koops, Director General, Policing Policy, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

It could be. Bill C-71 doesn't change the criteria that are considered. It would only change the mandatory time frame within which they must be considered. One of those mandatory criteria is whether a person has been convicted of an offence during the commission of which violence against another person was used, threatened, or attempted. If there has been a conviction on a criminal offence that includes violence, that is triggered by the review.

Regarding the question about visiting by the police, when police visit a home and there is a question of threatened violence with a firearm, they provide to the chief firearms officer of the province what's called a firearms interest police report. That is brought to the attention of the chief firearms officer of the province so they can review whether the person is still eligible to hold a firearms licence.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Thank you.

My next question has to do with the authorization to transport. I understand that Quebec and P.E.I. can limit the transport of firearms to a particular range or shooting club, and I also understand that legislation in the 1970s also included that provision, so if you owned a firearm, you could only take it from your home to the shooting club you belonged to. The way this legislation is worded, it would allow you to take the firearm anywhere within the province where you reside. If I lived in Oakville, Ontario, and I was on the road to Ottawa, someone who owned a firearm could say to the police that they were going to a shooting club in Ottawa.

I'm wondering if there is any openness on the part of the government to include an amendment that would bring the rules around these authorizations to transport more in line with those in Quebec and P.E.I. where you need to be a member of the gun range or shooting club to transport the weapon there.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Ms. Damoff, you're into an area where provincial and federal jurisdictions intersect. The provinces, as I understand it, have the authority to approve ranges or not, and some provinces take a bit of a different approach from others.

Perhaps I could ask Randall to explain the jurisdictional issue here. It's certainly an issue that we would be prepared to discuss with the provinces, but there may be a question of whether or not we have the complete authority.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

I have only 30 seconds left.

I understand it used to be in the federal legislation back in the 1970s and then it was changed.

[Randall Koops]

I'm not sure of that right now. We can check that for you and come back in the second hour.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Okay, thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

We'll come back to that question at some other point.

Mr. Paul-Hus.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to give verbal notice of a motion.

I would like the new national security advisor, Ms. Greta Bossenmaier, to be invited to the committee as soon as possible.

The motion will be tabled on Thursday, but I am giving verbal notice today.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Okay, thank you.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Hello, Mr. Goodale, ladies and gentlemen.

Mr. Goodale, you are presenting the bill today. In your remarks, you provided various statistics on violence, gangs, and all types of violence, drawing on data from 2013. You and I both know, however, that the crime rate in 2013 was exceptionally low as compared to the past 50 years in Canada. Yet you use the data from 2013 to show that there has been an increase in violence. If you exclude 2013 though, the average has not really increased significantly. I did not calculate that. It was Mr. Gary Mauser, from Simon Fraser University, who testified to that effect. You are using 2013 to justify the adoption of your bill.

I would like to know how Bill C-71 will address one of the main problems in Canada, which is violent crimes committed by street gangs. The chief of police from your home town of Regina said that street gangs are the main problem. The members of those gangs do not buy their guns legally. Bill C-71 does not offer any solution to this problem.

How do you think Bill C-71 will address the problem of street gangs?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Paul-Hus. I'm very glad to have your question.

With respect to the statistics, the numbers are really quite startling. As you look at the trend for almost all types of crime over the long term, the numbers have been steadily improving for Canada. The rates of crime generally have been going down.

Something changed around 2013, because between 2013 and 2016, which is the last year for which we have full statistics—we'll get the statistics for 2017 later on this year—the numbers with respect to gun violence took a turn in the opposite direction. They began to increase, contrary to the general trend for most other types of offences, which have continued to go down. But overall, the incidence of gun violence went up by about 30% between 2013 and 2016. I mentioned specific offences in my remarks, which show that trend upward.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Okay, but violent crimes are committed primarily by street gangs.

Bill C-71 pertains to gun owners, such as hunters and sport shooters. The bill establishes new rules for them, but does not include anything for street gangs. The majority of the crimes you mentioned are committed by criminals and not law-abiding citizens.

Do you have any figures on the percentage of crimes committed by gun owners who bought their guns on the legal market as compared to the percentage of crimes committed by street gangs?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

You had two elements in your first question. One was the statistics. The point I'm trying to make is that the statistics do verify our point. There has been a pretty substantial increase between 2013 and 2016. We hope to, through this legislation or other means, help turn that trend line downward again.

With respect to gangs, I think it needs to be acknowledged that this legislation is in the context of a larger public safety package that includes an investment by the Government of Canada of some $370 million over the next five years, and then $100 million a year with which we will be partnering with provinces, law enforcement agencies, and municipalities on a broad range of initiatives to tackle the issue of violence caused by gangs including most particularly guns and gangs.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Do you agree that there is nothing in Bill C-71 that tackles the problem of street gangs? The word “gang” is not even in the bill. As a result, in its current form, Bill C-71 will not address the problem of illegally obtained guns.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

The legislation, as indicated by the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, will assist the police in investigating guns used in crime and crime that uses guns. The police chiefs association's—

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

You and I both know that the guns that gangs use come from the black market. Criminals do not buy their guns from legal gun vendors in Canada. Those guns come from elsewhere, and that is the problem.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Where does that black market originate? Perhaps it's from thefts from gun shops and from pawn shops. I can think of a couple of instances in the last year, in my own province of Saskatchewan, where legal guns, restricted weapons, in one instance were in a pawn shop and in another instance were in a very reputable gun shop, and they were stolen in a break-in. These legal weapons became illegal weapons in the black market because of that.

Some of the tools we're providing in Bill C-71 will assist the police in tracking that evidence to find out where there are black market operations and to interdict those guns.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

You are saying that legal firearms vendors might perhaps sell such firearms on the black market, but can you gives us more information today about the source of guns in Canada? Are they brought in over the Canada-U.S. border? Do they come from elsewhere? The guns entering Canada are a problem.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Police authorities have told me—for example, the police in Surrey, British Columbia, and the police in Toronto—they would have said three to five years ago that the major source was smuggling operations coming in from the United States. However, they believe the nature of the source has changed, so that there is less smuggling in from the United States and more domestic sourcing of illegal weapons through, for example, break-ins in which perfectly legal guns are stolen and put into the black market in Canada.

The police have said—