Public Safety Committee on May 29th, 2018

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Again, beyond the democratic accountability, though, I can't imagine cabinet has the same type of expertise as the RCMP. There are duelling things here. You're talking about cabinet being accountable to Canadians, and even then, arguably indirectly, with individual MPs being elected in ridings, but I'm just wondering how they would be better equipped beyond just being people disagreeing with the decision made by the RCMP in terms of the expertise.

[Fady Mansour]

Certainly. I think we have to remember that very few people have any expertise in this area because it doesn't actually exist. Many of these decisions are in fact arbitrary.

In order to define something as a variant of something else, it's oftentimes quite arbitrary, and so when it's an arbitrary decision being made and then sanctioned by criminal conduct, that's a problem. To say that the RCMP have some kind of expertise in making decisions is really giving credence to something that doesn't exist.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Mr. Friedman, I have a question for you as well. You talked about the lack of data to illustrate the sources, where these firearms are coming from, whether they're smuggled across the border or whether they're domestic, and we can get into the debate about the appropriateness of that term.

Do you not believe that going back to the model that existed in the seventies, eighties, and nineties with regard to record-keeping by shops is not a good way to allow that data to exist? We've heard the police say such, that the number of firearms being sold without putting an onerous burden on those with PALs and also not putting an onerous burden on shops since most reputable businesses—and we hear this from everyone—do this already and it's the law in the U.S. as well.

[Solomon Friedman]

Yes. That's a really good question. I appreciate that.

We look at the system as it exists now. Firearm retailers track their sales. They do that internally. Those records to this day—I've actually seen it in criminal cases—can be the subject of judicial authorization. The police can go and get a warrant for those records, just like they can get a warrant to get the records of your having bought your last pair of sneakers. They can go and get that from any store.

We want to gather this data. The question then is as to how we are going about doing it. This law will do it on the pain of criminal sanction. When you and I think about—

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

I apologize for interrupting.

I should have warned you earlier, Mr. Dubé, that you'd gone well over the time.

[Solomon Friedman]

I had a great answer, though.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Yes, I'm sure the committee would be delighted to hear it.

Mr. Spengemann, you have five minutes, please.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Chair, thanks very much.

My first question is for Mr. Sneddon.

Mr. Sneddon, I represent Mississauga—Lakeshore, which is part of Peel region, Canada's fourth largest region.

I have some data here that takes us through 2015-16 on shootings, shootings being the discharge of a real firearm. The number of occurrences is up by 25%. The number of victims is up 58%. Estimated rounds fired are up 100%, the net number of rounds being 271 in 2016. We see similar trends in 2017.

I'm wondering if you could enlighten the committee on what you think this bill would do to address these trends. I know there are discussions about gangs. Much of the problem is gangs, and there are other mechanisms through which we address gangs. Nothing is done in isolation.

On the bill as you see it in front you, what would it do to help bring down the trends in these occurrences?

[Supt Gordon Sneddon]

The answer to that is really limited, really. To the point that was raised earlier, gangs are the problem, but it's the guns that the gangs bring with them that are the real problem. From my perspective, where did those guns come from? What's the source of those guns? As best as we're able to identify, steps that can be taken to enhance the police capacity to trace a firearm from its point of origin, from the point of manufacture to the scene of the crime, can be really important. Every gun tells a story. It's really important that we understand that. There are elements within this bill that help toward that. It won't solve the issue.

For example, right now as the law exists, for a non-restricted firearm used in a crime scene, there's no capacity to trace that to an individual. You have to start by going back all the way to the place of manufacture. Often when we go back to the place of manufacture, which is usually in the United States, they say they sold it to some company in Canada. You go to that company in Canada, and you trace it back from that point.

At least with the change and the verification process, it would be a help, and it would be of assistance to the chief firearms officers within the provinces. They'll be able to have some information to guide that police investigation.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Thanks very much for that.

As a Liberal, I support responsible gun ownership. Hunting is part of the Canadian tradition not just as a recreational opportunity, but it's also big business. If we look at the sport of hunting, I think we're in the zone of multiple hundreds of millions of dollars annually. A component of that is tourism. It's national tourism week in Canada. We have lots of friends from around the world who join us for the sport of hunting, including Americans.

I'm wondering if you could tell the committee your views on this whole allegation that this bill is recreating the the long-gun registry that has been discarded? Explain perhaps the process that you would have to go through in accessing records under Bill C-71. What kind of burden would that impose on the vendors of firearms who are involved in the industry, the business, and the sport of hunting, if you will?

[Supt Gordon Sneddon]

There are multiple questions within that question.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Feel free to unpack it in the remaining time.

[Supt Gordon Sneddon]

I will try to answer as best as I can.

I lost track of your question. I'm sorry.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

How much of a burden is it to the average Canadian firearms vendor to have to comply with the requirements under Bill C-71? What would it do to undermine, if at all, the sport of hunting?

[Supt Gordon Sneddon]

I guess it's a subjective question.

From my perspective, it doesn't present much of a burden, but other people might see it as presenting a burden. It's really that balance to the ability to maintain public safety and be able to identify the authors of a crime. It's really important from a policing and investigative perspective to be able to trace that firearm. I can't stress that enough.

Another thing is contained within that. We talked about time to crime. That's the time of manufacturing of the firearm to the time it appears on a crime scene. Sometimes that could be a year, five years, 10 years, or 20 years. Those records won't exist during that time frame. It's very unlikely that most businesses will maintain those records for that period of time without having vetted them or at least limited them.

Sometimes the time to crime could be as little as three days or a day. If you have that type of scenario, then you have a very clear indicator of who trafficked the firearm and how that firearm came to be used in a crime.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Chair, I don't know how much time I have left.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

You have half a minute.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Let me broach a question that I may have an opportunity to go back to.

I'm looking at an article from last week, which states, “Edmonton man pleads guilty in 'straw purchasing' weapons case”. It was a case involving the purchase of 40 restricted firearms between June and September 2016.

How would this bill help us prevent cases of this nature?

[Supt Gordon Sneddon]

Are you talking about this—

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

It's an important question, but he's left you no time to answer it. You can maybe work it back in at some other point.

Mr. Miller, welcome to the committee. You have five minutes, please.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's good to be here.

To all of our guests, thank you very much for being here.

As Mr. Spengemann mentioned—I have a little variance from it; I'm a Conservative—I very much believe in responsible gun ownership, as most law-abiding gun owners do.

The statistics that Mr. Friedman and Mr. Mauser gave are the kinds of science-based information that should be there—present and responsible—when making legislation.

One thing Mr. Mauser said, I believe, was that if there's a transport infraction or some other minor thing, or if somebody commits suicide by hanging and yet they own a firearm, that becomes a gun-related crime or a gun crime.

Mr. Harel, would you confirm that, yes or no?

[Mario Harel]

It's a very specific one there. To consider that crime a gun crime, I would doubt it, but—

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

So in your force it doesn't. Is that what you're saying?

[Mario Harel]

No, it doesn't.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Okay.

I want to go to some statistics, which I believe you gave, Mr. Friedman.

Gang crime is up 66%. Stolen guns are up 56%, yet gun crime is up 33%. That means that in looking at those figures, it's very clear that with responsible, law-abiding firearms owners, the percentage of those where these crimes are committed is next to nil. It's not nil; stuff happens, which is unfortunate.

My question is for you, Mr. Harel and Mr. Sneddon, and my time is limited.

The government said that it wants to address stolen guns and gang crime, which I know you gentlemen do as well. Point to me in legislation, in 15 or 20 seconds, where this bill actually addresses those two things.