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.
6 p.m.
Liberal
6 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Yes. Thank you, Chair.
Let me get this correct. The validity of the reference number is for only a certain prescribed period. That prescribed period is what?
6 p.m.
Director General, Policing and Firearms Policy, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
It will be prescribed by regulation.
6 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
It will be prescribed in the regulations. Do you have any idea of what that prescribed period might be? What would you be proposing to the minister upon the passage of Bill C-71? What would be the recommendation from the department to the minister for the prescribed period?
6 p.m.
Director General, Policing and Firearms Policy, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
At this point, I don't know.
6 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
You haven't established that? Okay.
In the event that a transaction occurs, how are you going to close the loop if the reference number is granted to the seller to sell to an approved purchaser? How are you going to close that loop to make sure the transaction is actually done?
6 p.m.
Director General, Policing and Firearms Policy, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
The loop isn't closed if the transaction is actually done. It simply provides the vendor with a period of time in which they will be assured that the purchaser's licence is valid. On how that's done, perhaps my colleagues can say what they're thinking.
6 p.m.
Director, Firearms Regulatory Services, Canadian Firearms Program, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
The period of validity related to the reference number is not tied to the firearms transaction itself but to the period of time by which we are saying that the licence is valid. As has been discussed earlier, there are circumstances that may bring an individual's licence into...whatever, or a licence may expire.
6:05 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Basically, the reference number is a permission slip per se for the transaction to go ahead for a prescribed amount of time. Is that correct? Am I understanding that right? I'm just putting it in layman's terms.
6:05 p.m.
Director General, Policing and Firearms Policy, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
In lay terms, it would be.... It provides the vendor with the assurance that the purchaser holds a valid licence to purchase. It's not related to an individual transaction that may then take place between them.
6:05 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
The whole purpose of having the reference number is in order to trace it, because the argument has been made that we'll be able to trace.... If the loop's not closed and we don't know that an actual transaction of a firearm occurred.... That's what I'm hearing. I'm hearing that it's just the permission for a transaction to occur. It's not necessarily—
6:05 p.m.
Director General, Policing and Firearms Policy, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Correct: there's no information collected about an individual firearm.
6:05 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Okay. That's fair enough. If there is no information collected about a firearm or if there is actually no assurance that in the issuance of a reference number a transaction actually occurred, how does that provide public value or a public safety value from a trace perspective when a firearm is found at a crime scene? How are you going to trace it? That's been the argument all along.
If at a crime scene you find a firearm with a serial number, and that's all you have, and you're telling me—and telling Canadians through me—that there is no firearm information actually transacted. You're telling me and Canadians that there is no closed loop that a transaction of a firearm actually occurred, yet somehow this is going to provide traceability that will add value to public safety. Can you please explain that to me?
6:05 p.m.
Director, Firearms Regulatory Services, Canadian Firearms Program, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
I can explain it, sir.
It relates to the chain of custody, in the sense that if the firearm were found and a trace were initiated on that firearm that brought the firearm back to you, as being the lawful owner of that firearm—
6:05 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
How would it, though, if the firearm information is not being kept?
6:05 p.m.
Director, Firearms Regulatory Services, Canadian Firearms Program, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Because the business record-keeping requirements that are also introduced in Bill C-71 would obligate businesses to record their first point of sale. The first point of sale, presumably, in the example I'm giving, would lead to you as the person who acquired that firearm from a vendor in Manitoba, for example.
You would then be able to say that you are the current owner of that firearm or to suggest that you transferred the firearm to somebody and in doing so verified their licence with the registrar of firearms. You would be able to have it confirmed by the existence of a reference number attached to your licence, indicating that, yes, you indeed did verify the licence at that period of time. Then it would allow the chain of custody to continue to the other person attached to that reference number, namely, presumably, the buyer of that firearm.
6:05 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Well, this is presuming much in terms of public safety. If the crime happened in British Columbia and the original point of sale for that firearm happened at a duck hunting store in Manitoba, and if there isn't a registry of this information, how would the officer know to go to that particular business to even find the records unless the information is provided to the chief firearms officer?
Now we get into the issue of warranted and unwarranted access or access without a warrant, which was not clear during the testimony that we heard. I'm still confused. It doesn't make any sense. If the reference number has nothing to do with the firearm transaction that happened at the business, unless we're keeping the information from the business.... Are we keeping the information with the reference number about the seller and the buyer?
6:05 p.m.
Director, Firearms Regulatory Services, Canadian Firearms Program, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
No, we are not. Do you mean relating to the business and the business-keeping records?
6:05 p.m.
Director, Firearms Regulatory Services, Canadian Firearms Program, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
No. The businesses themselves would be the custodians of those records.
6:05 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Now we're maintaining two registries. We're maintaining a transaction registry and, of course, the records of the store are a separate registry, that aren't actually linked together. That's supposed to provide traceability for public safety. That's what I'm hearing.
Okay, I don't have any other questions.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
6:05 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
Thank you, chair.
This particular amendment suggests that everything after lines 10 to 12 on page 7 be removed, so it would read:
The transferee shall provide to the transferor the prescribed information that relates to the transferee's licence.
This is similar to amendment CPC-21, in that it's unreasonable to subject law-abiding citizens, who are subject to criminal penalties and face sanctions under law and could be criminalized for failure to do the paperwork, to government technologies or paperwork work that, frankly, doesn't keep our communities any safer.
Thank you.
6:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Seeing no one wanting to debate, we'll vote on the amendment.
(Amendment negatived)
Amendment CPC-27 is also in the name of Mr. Motz.