Evidence of meeting #116 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 recording is available from Parliament.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Mr. Sneddon, I'm looking for some quick clarity on this. I only have a couple of minutes. Yes or no? They need a warrant to go in and search. Is that correct?
12:55 p.m.
Supt Gordon Sneddon
It's not that clear.
Do you mean to search?
12:55 p.m.
Supt Gordon Sneddon
To search, yes, absolutely you would need a warrant.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Thank you. I just want to be clear, because your testimony led me to believe that it wasn't the case.
12:55 p.m.
Supt Gordon Sneddon
No, but there could be some information that could be shared between the different agencies.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Of course, that would come out in a court of law through a chain of evidence and all those kinds of things.
12:55 p.m.
Supt Gordon Sneddon
Absolutely, and the benefit to that, obviously, is that it's subject to that court scrutiny.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Mr. Mauser, do you believe that the RCMP is the only organization in Canada that has technical firearm expertise?
12:55 p.m.
Professor Emeritus, As an Individual
No, of course not. The RCMP does have high-quality technical experts, but there are other organizations and individuals—many such. Some of these decisions are quite technical, and Canada and public safety would benefit by having their input as well.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
I agree with you that the RCMP should be every bit involved in making recommendations as to firearms classification as other actual technical experts would. However, they should not be the ones who are the sole source of that information or the sole source of that decision. Would you agree with that?
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
The minister said in the testimony here that the RCMP is the only one that can be trusted to get the classification or the reclassification of a firearm right, and not politicians, yet in law the minister actually has not allowed the RCMP to classify certain firearms. The legislation before you actually prohibits or classifies specific variants of a number of firearms. Do you see any hypocrisy in that position? I'll leave this question open to you or Mr. Friedman.
12:55 p.m.
Professor Emeritus, As an Individual
I see a serious problem with that. Elected government officials—MPs and cabinet—are the people responsible for making these decisions. The RCMP is the technical repository and is incredibly useful and valuable, but it cannot be allowed to make the decisions by itself. It must be political.
12:55 p.m.
Criminal Defence Counsel, Criminal Lawyers' Association
Let me give you an analogy to that.
This is not about the RCMP giving advice to cabinet. That's wonderful and that's exactly the way responsible government works. This is akin to allowing the Department of Justice to pronounce on the guilt or innocence of an individual. That's not how it works. We have an open court process—
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
If only you would have let me get to my next question, Mr. Friedman.
The Canadian firearms program is run by the RCMP. Would you agree with that statement?
1 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
If this legislation comes to pass, the RCMP will have, with the stroke of a pen, sole authority in law to classify or reclassify a firearm. Do you agree?
1 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Okay.
Are they the same organization, notwithstanding other police forces, who do the daily background check through the Canadian firearms program? Is that correct?
1 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Do you not see a conflict of interest when, with the stroke of a pen, the organization that is changing the laws of the land is actually the same organization that is enforcing those laws?
1 p.m.
Criminal Defence Counsel, Criminal Lawyers' Association
One of our most fundamental principles is that the police authority is subservient to the political authority. It's not for the purpose, obviously, of individual investigations or prosecutions but for the purpose of policy. You are here to set the policy—not the RCMP.
1 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Thank you very much.
Mr. Chair, if I can, I would like to make a quick point of order.
I want to clarify something. There was an opportunity when Mr. Spengemann asked Mr. Sneddon about retailers. I want to note that it would be nice to actually have the retail organizations here. They were left off the witness list and they were actually on a witness list that I proposed. I would suggest that if we actually want to hear from the retailers, we should allow them to testify at the committee.