Public Safety Committee on Feb. 17th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Ms. Cukier, if you'd like to make a very quick response, go ahead.

[Dr. Wendy Cukier]

Chair, I'd be happy to provide the references and the citations to the committee.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

That would be greatly appreciated.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

If you have that information and would like to send it to the committee, that would be very much appreciated. Thank you very much.

We go now to Mr. Noormohamed for four minutes, please.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Thank you very much.

Given the shortness of the time, I will try to be brief in my questioning.

I want to thank the witnesses for being here.

Dr. Cukier, I want to go back to you, because you were cut off a couple of times when answering very interesting questions from my colleague Ms. Dancho. I want to give you the opportunity to finish the answer that you were trying to give.

What evidence did you use to come to the conclusion that it was a legal supply of firearms that resulted in the types of murders you spoke of? Can you speak specifically to the type of data and the quality of that data, to allay any fears or concerns that folks might have that somehow these are just made-up numbers or that somehow people are pulling stats that are convenient out of the air? Can you just speak to the strict facts of the matter?

[Dr. Wendy Cukier]

Sure.

There are different sources of data that you can use as a researcher. One that you rely on is Statistics Canada data. We have certainly pulled that data and analyzed it for overall patterns. But Statistics Canada data does not provide contextual information about specific cases or sources of firearms in specific cases.

If you're interested in doing that kind of research, you have to go through the painstaking process of pulling the cases and doing research case by case on the information that's available about the source of a firearm, the context and whether the gun was legally owned or not. That's the work that we've been doing for very many years. That's the work that was presented and requested by the Mass Casualty Commission that recently concluded. We have all that data. It was presented to the commission along with other expert reports.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Thank you very much.

[Dr. Wendy Cukier]

It has not been published yet or peer-reviewed.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Understood. Thank you very much.

Professor Langlois, I'd like to ask you some questions about the research you've done into ghost firearms and the need to ban them.

As you pointed out, they present a growing threat to our communities, and they were covered by the amendments that were withdrawn.

I want to make sure that we're dealing properly with ghost handguns, and in particular the parts that are being legally imported for the purpose of making handguns.

I don't know the words in French, but we've heard a lot from our police officer friends about making sure, in the prevention of the building of ghost guns, that barrels, slides and trigger assemblies are regulated.

Can you speak a little bit about why that's important and what you think the best vehicle is for us to make sure that happens?

[Francis Langlois]

Yes, the slides, the barrels and other components of firearms should be regulated because the most popular types of handguns right now, unless they are fully printed or with a unique design, are copies of Glock pistols or similar pistols. All the other components besides the lower receiver are easily available legally either in Canada or in the United States. Those pistols that have the lower receiver printed with polymers are called “polymer 80s” because they are [Technical difficulty—Editor]. According to the American law, they are not ready at a sufficient level to be considered as a firearm. Anyone can take this kind of unfinished weapon and send it through the mail. It seems they are very popular here in Canada.

A young man was arrested near Dundee, Quebec. He had with him 249 polymer 80 pistols. They were imitations of Glock pistols. The idea is to bring them in and then buy or get the other components that are made of metal. This can be bought separately and is not considered as a firearm.

What I would recommend is that all those—

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Mr. Langlois.

Ms. Michaud, you now have two minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have several questions, but I'm only going to ask two of them. That will give Mr. Langlois all the time he needs to answer.

Do you think it would be possible to introduce an amendment in favour of your firearms classification method based on handling and the firing mechanism, even though the Firearms Act itself is based on a weapons classification system whose classes are: prohibited, restricted, and non-restricted? Would it confuse everything? Do you think it's doable? I think it is, but I'm not an expert in that area. That's why I'd like to hear your opinion.

I don't think the definition of a prohibited firearm suggested in amendment G‑4 was entirely bad. It's true that a number of aspects may have been confusing, including the fact that in the French version the term "fusil de chasse semi-automatique" was used.

Do you think that was a problem and that it might cause confusion?

Amendment G‑4 referred to "a detachable cartridge magazine with a capacity greater than five cartridges". There was a lot of disinformation about this, and we thought that it would be better to say "six or more cartridges", to avoid confusion, because there were already five-cartridge magazines.

You can no doubt see where I'm headed, Mr. Langlois. I'll give you some time to comment on this.

[Francis Langlois]

Thank you for your question, Ms. Michaud.

I believe it's possible to amend the act, or the Criminal Code, by maintaining the same classes: prohibited, restricted, and non-restricted weapons. For example, classifying weapons by barrel length, among other things, can be based on very minor differences. Let's look at the CX4 Beretta, the weapon used at Dawson College, for example. Its long version is non-restricted, but the short version, which is only a few centimetres shorter, is restricted. The firing system is the same, a semi-automatic firearm that uses 9 mm bullets, with a detachable magazine. The weapon's ergonomics are also distinctive.

Classifying weapons in terms of the firing system, whether for a handgun, a long gun, a manual weapon or a weapon with a high-capacity magazine makes much more sense. It avoids the problem of having some versions of weapons falling into the non-restricted class and others ending up in the restricted class. At the very least, it brings clarity.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you.

We're now going to give the floor to Mr. Boulerice for two minutes.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Earlier, the problem about permanent lists was mentioned, given the manufacturers' ability to ingeniously have different models of firearms with a variety of characteristics. The manufacturers can find loopholes to circumvent the act and stay off the lists.

Ms. Cukier, could you remind us on whether we should make ongoing adjustments or simply use a less precise, more comprehensive, list? Each option has its problems.

[Dr. Wendy Cukier]

Whom was that directed to?

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

To Ms. Cukier first.

[Dr. Wendy Cukier]

Thank you.

In my view, you need a combination. You establish the principle in the legislation, and you provide the list. As I said, we have a firearms reference table that was developed many years ago. I don't know if it's been kept up to date, but even though Internet access may be a problem, I think there are easier mechanisms to allow gun owners to search and find out how their gun is categorized.

I think we need both the list for the specificity and the language in the legislation to articulate the principle that we're not addressing guns reasonably used in hunting. We're looking at centrefires, semi-automatics that were designed to accept a large-capacity magazine or that have other military characteristics, which is consistent with definitions in many countries around the world.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Langlois, I'd like to end with what you have to say on this. There are only a few seconds left.

[Francis Langlois]

I think Ms. Cukier is right. The more effective and available the tools are, the better things will be.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, gentlemen.

That wraps up our questions for this panel. I would like to thank both of our witnesses for their excellent assistance today. It's most helpful for our study.

With that, we will suspend and bring in the next panel.

Thank you all.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

This is our second panel. With us today in person we have, from Aventure Chasse Pêche, Mr. Martin Bourget, president; and Kate Nadeau-Mercier, general manager.

With us by video conference we have, as an individual, Mr. Matthew Hipwell, president of Wolverine Supplies.

Welcome to you all.

We will start with five-minute statements from each group.

I would invite Aventure Chasse Pêche to make a statement of up to five minutes.

[Martin Bourget, President, Aventure Chasse Pêche]

My name is Martin Bourget, and I'm the president of Aventure Chasse Pêche. We mainly produce hunting and fishing television programs and a magazine. I'm also a columnist who specializes in that field, particularly on firearms, in which I do technical reviews. I have published hundreds of articles in my career, in audiovisual and print media, for companies like Browning, Mossberg and CANEX, as well as most of the manufacturers in the industry.

Our production work takes us to various sites in the field all over Canada, South Africa, the United States and elsewhere, in city, rural and remote communities, 52 weeks a year, with hunters and fishers who are legitimate firearms owners.

On the subject at hand, we feel that our sampling rate for analyzing more or less what's happening in the field is quite substantial. Our community is confused about all the crime statistics quoted by the authorities, who tell us about the criminal path that weapons lead to and how they end up being used for mischief on the ground. That's what they tell us. Forensic doctors report individual cases of psychological distress, mental disorders and intoxication that will lead to crimes with weapons described by other witnesses as domestic and legitimately-owned weapons.

The government is proposing a definition that is creating an enormous amount of confusion, with amendments G‑4 and G‑46. These two amendments contain arbitrary statements that we believe could in the long run make it difficult to apply and maintain measures that would genuinely protect the streets of Canada against armed criminality, particularly when the source is known. Then there are the lists of weapons, and criteria like barrel length and the number of joules, which create yet more confusion, because there are a lot of inconsistencies.

Legitimate gun owners in Canada are deeply puzzled about the very legitimacy of the process set out in Bill C‑21 and the enforcement of these measures. They are asking for nothing less than a study of the bill's true impact on the safety of Canadians and on traditional hunting and harvesting, and sport shooting.

[Kate Nadeau-Mercier, General Manager, Aventure Chasse Pêche]

The way I see it, the hunting and fishing environment in which I work finds itself in a very unusual anxiety-producing climate given the people involved. This community finds itself unjustly targeted, handcuffed and potentially criminalized.

In addition to my role as general manager, and as the host and producer of a television program that has more than 869,000 viewers every week, as well as a hunting and fishing magazine, I head up a community made up exclusively of women, 20,600 women hunters, fishers, gatherers and nature lovers. This gives me an everyday appreciation of the values these mothers share in terms of their gathering activities, and the role they play in the education of our children and the entire community.

I would also like to mention my concerns about the disastrous economic impact of amendments G‑4 and G‑46, and emphasize how important it is to be as careful as possible in the development of new amendments.

Since the early days of Bill C‑21, the industry has been hit hard, and then came the freeze on handguns in October 2022.

The paradox between the government's desire to protect citizens and the measures it is attempting to introduce to get there makes me truly worried for the community of legitimate gun owners. BillC‑21 should be reviewed in its entirety, or voluntarily abandoned and replaced by a new approach.