Public Safety Committee on May 31st, 2018

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Thank you very much.

My question goes to Mr. Martin and Mr. Nielsen.

Mr. Nielsen, when I was a kid, I took a firearms safety course, for what that's worth. Then again, I haven't asked my question yet, so we'll see where things go.

I want to ask you a question relating to authorization to transport. Until 2012, restricted and prohibited firearms owners had to get an authorization to transport their firearm to a gunsmith. Therefore, it was not automatic. Under C-71, as you know, this requirement will change.

The question I have for you, sir, is this. What, if any, provincial rules regulate what a gunsmith is and—more importantly—where they operate from? From a legal perspective, can anyone be a gunsmith, hold that title, and run that sort of operation? Also, can they operate from, let's say, a garage or a basement in their home?

[Hugh Nielsen]

A gunsmith, to my knowledge, is a person who has been a tradesman, and he will have a ticket to repair guns.

What this bill does is actually a safety issue. You've taken the course, you're on the range, you fire, and you have a misfire. That means the gun doesn't work. You wait 60 seconds with the firearm pointed in a safe position and you cannot now retrieve that bullet. You have a gun that doesn't have a bullet in it. Where are you going to take it?

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

I don't mean to cut you off, sir, but I have limited time. Again, back to the question—

[Hugh Nielsen]

Okay.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Under provincial regulations, what rules exist that apply to gunsmiths—specifically, to where they operate? Let's put it succinctly like that. Can a gunsmith operate anywhere? Can they operate in their home, in their garage or basement? Also, when you say the “ticket” they have, what's that the result of? Did they have to go through extensive training? What are the requirements? Are they licensed? Tell us about gunsmiths.

[Hugh Nielsen]

Allan will respond to this.

[Allan Martin]

First of all, the word “smith” is determined as a German word meaning “mechanic”. A mechanic takes training for a five-year period. A place of business is sponsored by a business licence, so it might be a home business or it might be commercial. We are not versed in that criteria. Effectively, taking a firearm to a gunsmith—this is a person with absolute knowledge on repairs—puts a safe gun back in the hands of the general public.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

What you're telling me is that an individual seeking a gun to a gunsmith could, effectively, go to someone's garage, go to someone's basement—to use those examples. They can operate there, gunsmiths can. That's what I'm getting from you.

[Allan Martin]

No. A home business is not in a garage per se. There are certain criteria for a home business in most communities. If he is a legitimate gunsmith he will advertise his trade. He will be identified as such. They have a professional code to live up to.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Thank you very much.

To the OFAH, in fact to all of you but particularly to the OFAH, I represent an urban-based riding but it's surrounded—London, Ontario, is—by rural communities. I know you've done a lot to promote hunting in Ontario. It's a prized tradition, as is target shooting. Yes, I represent a city, but I really respect the work you have done, although we do disagree on certain points.

The argument with respect to classification is where I want to go. It assumes, your argument does, that you'll find a sympathetic hearing when it comes to any classification controversy. In your brief you say here that you would prefer for the law, on matters of classification, to open a door for parliamentarians to weigh in, Canadians at large to weigh in. I can tell you—I know my constituency best here, so I'll speak for London North Centre—there's great concern when it comes to guns. Any opportunity that there is to strengthen public safety, particularly on background checks but in other ways, I think Canadians can get behind that.

Let's look at parliamentarians. There are 338 members of Parliament. Some of us are gun experts, apparently. Mr. Calkins has spoken at length about his expertise in the area of guns, and I have no information to doubt that. Do you think that parliamentarians are best suited to deal with these sorts of concerns?

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Mr. Fragiskatos, this has happened two or three times in the course of this hour. Members run through their five minutes and then leave it to the witnesses to try to answer when the time has already expired. I have to be a little rigid about the expiration of time. Again, I'll invite witnesses to try to respond to Mr. Fragiskatos' important question in some other response.

We have a final three minutes allocated to Mr. Dubé. We have roughly 15 minutes left, colleagues. If you wish, we can just go five minutes, five minutes, back and forth. Is that suitable until two o'clock? Does that work?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Okay. Would you indicate to the clerk your order of questioning?

Mr. Dubé, you have your final three minutes.

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

Thank you, Chair.

I just want to go back to the question that I asked previously. I don't think the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters had a chance to respond. Again, on shop record-keeping, I don't know if you're able to answer this, but what, if any, impacts did it have on your members under its previous existence prior to the long gun registry?

[Matt DeMille]

In this case these are records that are, for all intents and purposes, owned by the vendor and not by government. It's not the responsibility, necessarily, of the firearms purchaser to keep any records. It's really more on the vendors, I think. What we talked about earlier on purchasing a firearm, from our perspective, is mostly about how those records would be kept, ensuring the safekeeping of those records. Also, then, we're wondering now, in looking forward at what may come through this legislation, how those records would be accessed and used in the future.

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

The last question I have for both of you is just about transferring firearms from one individual to another. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that the reference number that's been generated—which has been the cause of some controversy, for lack of a better term—is simply used to confirm that the verification was done insofar as the legislation would require it.

I know that's different from what happens now, because restricted and prohibited firearms are registered, but for non-restricted firearms, as is proposed in Bill C-71, would it not basically just be a number—like a package tracking number you'd get from ordering something online, for example—where you just punch that in to validate the transaction and then sell your firearm, contrary to the existence of a registry, for example?

[Matt DeMille]

It was our understanding that the Canadian firearms program would maintain records of those reference numbers, and associated with those would be the PAL of the seller and the buyer. Therefore, there would be some personal information, through that, attached to that reference number. That's our understanding of how that would happen.

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

Okay.

Were you given any information on how that information could be accessed—the reference number and so forth?

[Matt DeMille]

No, and that's an area we would like to learn a lot more about. That's where the devil is in the details about how those records would actually be used. That's a really important thing for us to get some more information on in order to make an informed decision on what that looks like.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Dubé.

We have five minutes for Mr. Spengemann.

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

Thank you very much. My questions are for Ms. Bear.

Ms. Bear, thank you very much for being with us. The committee is assembled on and greets you from the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin people.

I wanted to give you the opportunity—you've touched upon it in conversation with colleagues—to restate the importance of firearms, both culturally and economically, to our first nations. Be as comprehensive as you'd like to be, perhaps with the assistance of Mr. Nielsen, and then I have a second question for you that I'm hoping to get in within the five minutes I have.

[Vice-Chief Heather Bear]

Okay. If I can understand the question, you're asking about our cultural perspective in terms of guns?

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

The significance of the firearm, both traditionally and culturally. You mentioned it as a gift, but I'm wondering also about the firearm as a means of earning a livelihood, both through hunting and through guiding.

[Vice-Chief Heather Bear]

Yes. First, I just want to quickly share that as a rite of passage, many of our young sons go through a training. They go through what you might call your licence, the FAC. It happens when a boy goes into puberty, so it is a rite of passage.

We hunt for sustenance. We hunt for ceremonies. We hunt for our culture and our way of life. We make sausage, we dry the meat, and for our diet it's critical. When we talk about food sovereignty, that's very important to our people. We have a right to live the way we've always lived. In the days before treaty and the days before colonization, we had our ways and great respect for our tools, whether it be a gun or whatever tool you use to hunt.

We don't live in a lawless land. We have an oral tradition. Our laws are embedded in our oral tradition, and that's where we get our training. It's the best training in the world.

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

Thank you so much for that.

Mr. Nielsen, perhaps you mentioned it in your comments earlier. How important is the ancillary business of guiding and hunting tourism to our indigenous peoples?