Evidence of meeting #118 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.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB
The other point is that a particular firearms shop may not have that designation to handle prohibited firearms currently.
The CZ rifles are very popular. A lot of folks have them in their inventory. They do not have a prohibited licence at this point as a business. Now, if we make these prohibited, will they get grandfathered in? Will they automatically get a prohibited licence due to the fact that they have in their inventory CZ rifles?
12:45 p.m.
Nicole Robichaud Counsel, Department of Justice
No, they wouldn't automatically have prohibited privileges on their licence.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB
No, not the way it's currently written; that's why we need to put in for businesses to be grandfathered.
12:45 p.m.
Counsel, Department of Justice
Currently the section 12 provisions on grandfathering only deal with individuals. Subsection 12(1) creates the general rule that individuals are not eligible to have prohibited firearms, and then the remainder of section 12 is an exception to that rule.
12:45 p.m.
Counsel, Department of Justice
Then section 11 of the Firearms Act is what deals with business eligibility for prohibited firearms.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB
Yes, but that's the trouble. We're going to be bringing in a new regime. We're adding several firearms that are popular to the list that are prohibited, and a lot of firearms shops have them that don't necessarily have the right licensing to handle prohibited firearms, and now they're going to be in possession of prohibited firearms. Yes, one part of it is whether they will be compensated for those prohibited weapons, but the other part is whether they will be grandfathered into the prohibited licence, much the same way as when we went from the old licence to the PAL, in that same space you were grandfathered in. That's what Kevin—from the shop right across my road—was saying, that he has several of these CZs in his possession and he wonders what will happen when they outlaw them. That's where we need to put in, everywhere it says “individual who holds a licence...”, that when the law gets changed they get grandfathered in on those particular weapons. They get that classification on their licence exception. That's what this amendment is getting to.
I think I clarified that.
12:50 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC
I was just wondering, since grandfathering is essentially what's already deeming in the law as it's currently written—putting aside Bill C-71—had a weapons classification been changed, then the deeming provision would have operated the same way as it would under Bill C-71 without this amendment. Is that correct?
12:50 p.m.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
I think I can answer that.
The bill, as introduced, does not deem these firearms to be non-restricted. What happens is that the original deeming provision that's currently in the Criminal Code would be repealed and what would apply would be the legal classifications, the definitions that are set out in the Criminal Code, so it wouldn't be a deeming provision.
Grandfathering is a separate concept from deeming. Grandfathering is a regime that applies when a firearm goes from one classification to a more restricted classification. So it doesn't change the classification of the firearm. What it does is permit possession of these firearms for the original owners. It doesn't change the legal classification of the firearm. It just permits a closed group of individuals to possess that firearm.
12:50 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC
My question then would be—because a classification can change, and that's not something new with this bill—what would happen for a business currently. If they had the proper licensing they could—
12:50 p.m.
Director, Firearms Regulatory Services, Canadian Firearms Program, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Currently, in the example you used, if the classification of a firearm changed to a more restrictive classification, businesses would be required to have that business condition on their licence to possess those types of firearms. If they do have those conditions on the licence to possess those types of firearms for that prescribed purpose, then they could continue to own those firearms. If they do not have the prescribed purpose, then they would have to have the firearms removed from their inventory—for example, by export sale to another business that does have that prescribed purpose.
12:50 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC
My final question, Chair, if I may, would then be to clarify. In other words, the situation with the firearms that are listed in Bill C-71 would be the same as any change in classification to a more restricted category currently, as far as the business is concerned.
12:50 p.m.
Director, Firearms Regulatory Services, Canadian Firearms Program, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
I believe so, yes.
12:50 p.m.
NDP
12:50 p.m.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
There's nothing in the bill that specifically would change the regime of how firearms that are changed to a more restrictive status are treated by businesses.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Is there any further debate? Seeing none, those in favour of CPC-10?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We don't have to rule about CPC-11 or CPC-12.
We're now on CPC-10.1. It's in the name of Mr. Paul-Hus.
You have about five minutes.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Are we ready to talk about it, Mr. Chair?
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Okay.
I think it's an oversight in the bill.
There is provision for the declassification of weapons, except for owners covered by a grandfather clause. Those firearms will now be prohibited. However, we didn't think about the next step. For example, a firearm can be transferred by bequest, by inheritance. Therefore, the daughter or son of the gun owner must be allowed to own the gun. Of course, this is always conditional on the person meeting the conditions for obtaining the licence. But, the fact remains that this provision hasn't been included.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
One moment, please.
Nobody has anything to say about that, but what will people do with the guns if someone dies?
