Public Safety Committee on Oct. 4th, 2022

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

There are lots of parts to that question.

Regarding assault weapons, we introduced a national prohibition specifically to remove all those types of firearms from our communities and committed to putting a mandatory buyback program in place.

I also agree with you that the tools proposed in Bill C‑21, including harsher penalties, won't alleviate the problem if they're used in isolation. We have to introduce a series of measures simultaneously to send a very strong and clear message to all members of organized crime. That moreover is what Bill C‑21 will do by imposing harsher penalties and establishing surveillance tools both within my department and in other authorities such as police services. The goal is to let people who want to terrorize our communities know that we've had enough and they have to stop.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Just one final question.

You said you wanted us to pass this bill quickly. However, you passed a firearms bill in 2019, just before I was elected, but regulations weren't made under that legislation until several years later, in May of this year.

We can see that certain aspects of Bill C‑21 would come into force by regulation, in particular the definition of an elite sport shooter and the requirement of a licence to import ammunition.

Do you think you'll make regulations sooner next time? We had a long wait last time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

I apologize for interrupting, Ms. Michaud, but your time is up.

Mr. Mendocino, I allow you 30 seconds to answer the question.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

The answer is yes. I can give you some examples following the meeting.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Ms. Michaud.

We go now to Mr. MacGregor. You have six minutes, please.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Thank you so much, Mr. Chair.

Welcome back, Minister. It's good to see you here.

I want to continue on the subject of airsoft guns that Mr. Noormohamed brought up.

I had a great summer of consulting with constituents and I got to visit the Victoria Fish and Game Protective Association. They have a large airsoft course, and I played the part of a referee during a match. The people who are involved in the sport really love what they do. It's a growing sport and all sorts of demographics take part in it. They are quite concerned with how Bill C-21 is currently written, and I know that your department has received a lot of correspondence.

When you introduced this version of Bill C-21, your department was kind enough to provide a backgrounder to members of Parliament. Your backgrounder stated that current owners would be allowed to keep and use the ones that they already own, but they cannot transfer them to another person. Manufacturers will be able to sell them, but they will have to adjust the designs, and your government will consult with industry and law enforcement on how to implement the law.

The backgrounder states that current owners will be allowed to keep the ones they already own, but I'm curious how that is possible with the current wording of the bill. According to the Library of Parliament's reading of the bill, it's going to effectively make them prohibited devices. There's a bit of a disconnect here.

As a quick follow-up, what kind of consultations have you had with the industry? What are some ways that we can find our way through this impasse?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

First, thank you very much for your advocacy on this issue. I appreciate that you've been speaking with the industry and with responsible airsoft owners and other gun owners. We do appreciate the feedback.

Second, we ourselves are at the same time consulting with a number of different industry leaders and lobbyists, and I just want to stress for the record that we look forward to working collaboratively with them in the spirit of making sure that legislative intent is aligned with language. Of course, if there is ambiguity there, let's try to clear it up. That's one of the important functions of this committee: to be sure that the government gets the benefit of some input on how we can have a bill that reflects what we were trying to accomplish, including as it relates to airsoft.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

I appreciate that. I know my constituents are listening to this, so the very fact that you said you're open to collaboration on this issue is good. I will commit to working with you to find a way forward that is satisfactory to everyone.

Second, again involving the Victoria Fish and Game Protective Association, I have to give them a plug. They also invited me, on a separate day, to witness a competition by the International Practical Shooting Confederation, IPSC. They were concerned about a reference made in the bill. I think it's clause 43 that would create a new section, proposed section 97.1. In that section, the only discipline that is mentioned is the International Olympic Committee or the International Paralympic Committee, which is a very small subsection of people. These are elite shooters.

I'm wondering what the correspondence has been like from representatives of IPSC. Is your department open to broadening the language, because, again, these are people—my constituents—who are very passionate about what they're doing. I witnessed a competition; it's very safe. The rules are pretty well enforced.

I just want to hear your comments on that, Minister.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

First, I think you know where we're coming from in the introduction of the national handgun freeze and its rationale. At the same time, we have proposed a number of reasonable exemptions, including for those who participate in sport shooting who represent Canada at an elite level.

I am sure that within the various communities across the country, there are different standards in mind about what the threshold should be, and this is part of the ongoing consultation we are embarked upon.

My response to you would be that if your constituency has concerns or would like to propose other areas where we can refine what that standard is, I think it is incumbent on us to be open-minded about that, while at the same time recognizing that what we are trying to do is to reverse the alarming trend around handgun violence. As I said in my introductory remarks, handguns have become the number one type of gun used in homicides.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Yes, that's understood.

I think I have time for one final question.

You received a letter on May 16 of this year. It was from a number of women's groups who were quite concerned with the so-called “red flag” law provisions in this legislation. They are very concerned about the downloading of responsibility, especially when the onus may be on an individual who is fleeing domestic violence, to go and face the court system by themselves. I know there have been improvements in this version to try to protect anonymity, but you must be familiar with this May 16 letter, Minister.

Do you have anything to say to this committee in response to the concerns they raised?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Well, first, we will continue to work with them and all of the partners who have come forward to offer constructive ways in which we can tackle gender-based violence, intimate partner violence and domestic abuse in connection with guns, which is a phenomenon that has become more and more serious, particularly over the last number of years.

What we had said in response, I believe, during one of the last times that I appeared before this committee, is that we would be receptive to finding ways to ensure that those protocols were present, not as an exclusive alternative to using or leveraging existing authorities but rather to be used in conjunction with them.

We did, I think, two things that were directly responsive to the concerns that were laid out in that letter and elsewhere. First, for those who want to see red flag laws introduced, we built in protections to reduce the potential for retaliation on complainants who wish to come forward. Second, in my renewed mandate letter to the commissioner of the RCMP, we set out as a priority the need to be sure that local law enforcement has the diverted resources necessary to respond to gun calls for which there is concern around intimate partner violence and gender-based violence.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Mr. MacGregor.

We'll start our second round with Mr. Lloyd.

Mr. Lloyd, please go ahead for five minutes.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, you're about to embark on a program that could reach into the billions of dollars. Have you or your department commissioned any studies that demonstrate that this buyback plan is an effective use of taxpayer dollars to enhance public safety?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

I've spoken with the victims and the families of victims—

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

But have you commissioned a study that proves this?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Of course we're studying the costing very carefully—

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

You're studying it currently? You don't have proof right now that it will?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Mr. Lloyd, let me unpack the answer for you for just a moment, if I can.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Well, I don't need to, because you said you don't have a study. You're currently studying it.

Minister, I have an engagement paper that was sent out by your department in October of 2018. It directly states, under the heading “International experience”, that “In all cases the data does not conclusively demonstrate that these handgun or assault weapon bans have led to reductions in gun violence....”

Your own ministry recognizes that there isn't data to support your buyback argument. Why are you wasting billions of dollars on a scheme that hasn't worked?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Before I begin, I wonder if I could be permitted to actually complete an answer. If you're not interested and you would just like to read from a sheet—

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Go ahead, Minister.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

—you can do that, but I'd like to be able to finish. Is that okay?

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Go ahead.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

We took the decision to ban assault-style rifles because they were designed to kill. We looked at some very careful standards around the definition that is contained in the order in council. We are now setting about the launch of a buyback program so that we can get these guns out of our community, because we owe it to the victims to make sure there isn't another tragedy or mass casualty.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

The fact is that you don't have any studies that demonstrate that this measure will enhance public safety.

Minister, since you believe that a gun buyback for law-abiding firearms owners will enhance public safety, as you just said, why are you also not launching a gun buyback for illegal firearms possessed by criminals?