Evidence of meeting #120 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.
5:25 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC
As I read this amendment, it actually deletes everything that prescribes the actual information that's collected. If anything, I think it actually gives more of an ability for the registrar to collect more information as opposed to the bill, as it's explained now, where it says the following:
The transferee shall provide to the transferor the prescribed information that relates to the transferee’s licence, for the purpose of enabling the transferor to request that the Registrar issue a reference number for the transfer.
That's information that's already being provided for the licence. This amendment deletes lines 3 to 19, replacing them with the wording that's there. It essentially would no longer have any prescriptive force over what is actually being provided for the sake of this transfer.
That's my reading of it, at least.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Well, I'm disturbed that.... The presumption in Ms. Damoff's question is that anybody whose name and licence are attached to a reference number is automatically going to be the perpetrator of the crime, which is the exact problem we're trying to exonerate law-abiding firearms owners from, the onerous aspect of having their personal information stored in a registry.
A registry is a database. A database is kept by having primary numbers, unique identifiers, in each table, otherwise known as a reference number or a primary key. This is very basic stuff for anybody who understands how a relational database works, unless this is an object-oriented database that the RCMP or the firearms centre is using, in which case we would have object IDs, which are completely different things.
To somehow suggest that this is not going to be...and you can't trace against something that doesn't exist. This is a registry by another name. It's simply a transactional one. I'm pleased that the NDP amendment has actually been moved, but we should be under no illusions about what this actually is.
June 7th, 2018 / 5:30 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
On a point of order, Mr. Chair, I'm biting my tongue here, but this point about the registry keeps coming up and keeps coming up. From a legal perspective, a registry has to be organized, maintained, and overseen by a central authority, in other words, a state, and we don't have that here.
So let's just talk about first principles, basic things. It is not a registry in any way, shape, or form.
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Hang on, Mr. Fragiskatos. First of all, that's not a point of order; it is a point of debate. Certainly, if you catch my eye, you're more than welcome to put your name down here.
Did you wish to amplify your point after your point of order?
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
After what Ms. Damoff said, and after Mr. Fragiskatos raised a point of order, even though there was no reason to do so, I would like to ask our officials a question.
Who records the reference numbers? Who is responsible for keeping them?
5:30 p.m.
Director, Firearms Regulatory Services, Canadian Firearms Program, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
The requirement under the proposed legislation would be that the registrar of firearms, who currently manages that licence verification element for restricted and prohibited firearms, be responsible for the management of the information being collected.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
I see.
It's the same word in French, "registraire". It means a person who manages a registry. The records are thus maintained by the registrar. So someone somewhere possesses the information—we can't deny it. You can call it what you will, a list, a database, or a registry, but the fact nevertheless remains that we are playing with words here. There is someone in an office who has a computer connected to the cloud or who records the information on a hard disk.
We aren't opposed to the point raised by Ms. Damoff concerning the traceability of crimes, but the fact nevertheless remains that the information is stored somewhere. This is therefore a registry.
From what my colleagues and I have understood, and based on the information Mr. O'Reilly is giving us, this contradicts amendment CPC-2, which carried unanimously, because the act will prohibit the creation of a registry. However, it is a registry. We have to stop playing with words.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
Although I would prefer not to give my friend, Mr. Fragiskatos, any more substance to his point of order which was ruled out of order, I will add this statement, and officials can correct me: Transfer numbers are managed by a registrar of firearms, who is responsible inside the Canadian firearms program, which is managed by the RCMP, which is then responsible and answerable directly to the Minister of Public Safety, which, the last time I checked, was the Government of Canada.
I'm just saying, if it smells like one, it probably is one.
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
On that happy note, we'll vote on amendment CPC-23.
(Amendment CPC-23 negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
It being 5:30, I propose a 15-minute break. Is that acceptable, Mr. Motz?
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
Given that our officials are going to be here for the duration, can we suspend and let them have supper with us?
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
I don't want them to be choking on their food while we're talking.
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
I'm sure they have, as I've been choking on their answers.
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
So that we don't have any gag reflexes going on here, I'll suspend for 15 minutes, knowing full well that people will probably come back in 20.
Thank you.
5:50 p.m.
Liberal
5:50 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
This is somewhat along the same lines as amendment CPC-23.
Ultimately, if we want to be sure the registry is not reinstated, our amendment proposes a way to do it that would ensure that reference numbers are completely and safely erased. We think that would really help ensure that there is no record retention that would allow the registry to continue to exist. This is simply consistent with what we have been proposing for the past little while.
5:50 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Yes. If no one has anything to say, I will continue.
Earlier we talked about maintaining the database. Do you have any idea of the extent of the costs involved from the moment the reference number system becomes functional? What would the personnel needs be to manage all that, and what would be the associated costs? We haven't discussed costs to date. I would recall that former Prime Minister Chrétien said at the time that it would cost $2 million, and it ultimately cost $2 billion.
In the case of the reference numbers and the retention of those records, do you have an idea how much that would cost?
