Public Safety Committee on March 7th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Mr. Noormohamed.

Ms. Michaud, you have two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

The rest of my questions will be for you, Grand Chief.

You've said several times that you support a ban on high-capacity semi-automatic firearms.

Could you tell us again what “high-capacity” means to you?

[Grand Chief Ken Kyikavichik]

I'm referring to at least 90% of the rifles that have been listed on the proposed legislation. There are many of them on there. I'm not going to get into specifics at this particular juncture, but I said “assault-style automatic weapons”. We do use some semi-automatic rifles, as I mentioned earlier in my testimony, and I want to be clear on the delineation between the fully automatic and the semi-automatic weapons.

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

So you'd want the ban to exclude the semi-automatic rifles commonly used for hunting, for example.

[Grand Chief Ken Kyikavichik]

That is correct.

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

Okay, thank you.

In your opening remarks, you also mentioned that you would support a buyback program for firearms that become prohibited. Did you mean assault rifles, handguns or both? I know the government has promised to create a buyback program for military-style assault rifles, but nothing's been announced for handguns. Let's not forget that Bill C‑21 was originally about handguns.

Are you envisioning a buyback program that would cover both assault rifles and handguns?

[Grand Chief Ken Kyikavichik]

The buyback would be in force only for a lot of the rifles that have been prohibited or deemed prohibited under potential legislation and are used for subsistence harvesting by our people. There will be some instances in which individuals are in possession of restricted firearms if the previous Bill C-21 is passed. It is in those instances that we would look at a buyback program.

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

When the government finally consulted you, was the buyback program discussed? I believe you said you met with Mr. Mendicino on January 31.

[Grand Chief Ken Kyikavichik]

Yes, it was, along with other leaders from across the Northwest Territories. There were at least a couple who had mentioned support for this type of program.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Ms. Michaud.

We will go now to Mr. Julian.

Mr. Julian, you have the hammer. You have two and a half minutes, please.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Thanks very much, Mr. Chair.

Grand Chief, I'd like to follow up on Madame Michaud's questions around the buyback. You mentioned in your testimony, basically—and I'm paraphrasing you—that it's important to have a properly done buyback program. Was it discussed with the minister, or do you or the Gwich'in Council have recommendations around how a buyback program should be structured so that it meets the needs of indigenous people?

[Grand Chief Ken Kyikavichik]

We do not at this time. It can be the focus of some of our discussions on continued consultation on this potential legislation.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Thank you.

You also mentioned the issue of gangland violence, which is something that we're facing everywhere. We've seen a marked increase, and law enforcement has seen a marked increase in the use of ghost guns. They're untraceable, and 3D printers can put them together using firearm components. They can produce a deadly weapon that is untraceable.

Do you have concerns about the use of ghost guns, and is this something you feel the government should be taking more seriously as well?

[Grand Chief Ken Kyikavichik]

I'm not particularly familiar with ghost guns. I've been hearing about them only recently. However, nothing really surprises me anymore with the artillery that's being used by those who operate in the drug world and that's making its way into our northern and remote communities.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Locally, you have seen some of the same concerns raised, or you've actually seen the production of ghost guns or the sale of ghost guns in the same way that in some regions of the country we've seen a marked increase. This is certainly something that law enforcement has flagged as well. Is it something that is of concern to you?

[Grand Chief Ken Kyikavichik]

It is not at this time.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Okay. I have only a few seconds.

You mentioned, as well, the issue of military-style weapons. Do you believe that manufacturers should also bear some responsibility when it comes to these types of weapons being present in Canada?

[Grand Chief Ken Kyikavichik]

As I stated earlier, there's clearly a need for broad-based consultation with all Canadians—indigenous and non-indigenous—and that includes manufacturers that are stakeholders in this legislation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Mr. Julian. That wraps up our questioning for this panel.

I would like to thank our witnesses, Grand Chief Kyikavichik and Chief Lazare. Thank you very much for your time today and for helping us in our study.

With that, I will suspend to bring in the next panel.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

With that, we will resume this meeting.

Welcome to our new panel.

With us today, via video conference, we have Ms. Lynda Kiejko, Olympian, as an individual.

We were supposed to have Dr. Simon Chapman, but he had some difficulty with his equipment and will not be able to participate. He will send a brief, I understand.

We also have, from the Fédération québécoise des chasseurs et pêcheurs, Monsieur Marc Renaud, president, and Madame Emily Vallée, communications coordinator.

Each group will have up to five minutes for opening remarks. Afterwards, we will start our questions.

We will start now. I will invite Ms. Kiejko to make an opening statement of up to five minutes.

Please go ahead.

[Lynda Kiejko, Olympian, As an Individual]

Thank you very much.

My name is Lynda Kiejko. I am a two-time Olympian in the sport of pistol shooting. I am also president of the Alberta Handgun Association, which is an organization that fosters and promotes the ISSF, otherwise known as the Olympic style of competition. I come from a family of Olympians and pistol shooting. My father and one of my sisters were both Olympians.

I am very grateful for this opportunity to appear before the committee today. However, I'm also very angry and sad. I'm angry that my tax dollars are being wasted on policy that doesn't increase public safety. I'm angry that no matter how well I follow the law, the law keeps changing. These law changes are impacting me, and people like me, directly.

I take great pride in representing my country on the world stage, as do all athletes. I'm sad that due to the handgun ban, the order in council, Bill C-71 and this proposed legislation, I will not be able to represent Canada on the world stage. Athletes who come after me won't even have an opportunity to compete, as they will have no access to competition firearms.

I am angry this government has no concern for actual safety. If an actual effort were made to increase public safety, I likely would not be here as a witness. If you had the interest of public safety in mind, the measures you take would not affect me, a vetted firearm owner. Your measures would affect criminals. Nothing I see proposed in Bill C-21 or the withdrawn amendments makes measurable improvements to public safety.

Criminals have criminal behaviour. No matter what the law says, criminals will continue doing what they do. Instead of reducing crime, your handgun bans, orders in council and efforts to virtue signal that you're doing something have increased my paperwork by six weeks in order to represent Canada on the world stage. I now pay the government for the privilege of returning home with my guns, which are my property, on every return to Canada. The extra paperwork I do does not make you, my community or my children safer than they were before your measures were put into place. It is a waste of my tax dollars. Instead of preparing to compete against my peers from Ukraine, Greece, South Korea and France—among many others—I'm doing paperwork for the privilege of not being arrested or having my competition equipment confiscated at the border when I return home.

These measures also remove any opportunity I have to take up hunting, which is something my father did, and which is an inherent Canadian tradition. Not only do I need to have my PAL, but I need to take a hunter's safety course and plan out details of where I will hunt. Banning semi-automatic rifles removes this opportunity. Almost all hunters use semi-automatic rifles with the same magazine capacity as my competition handgun. The course that PAL holders are required to take, on top of hunter education courses, makes hunters and competitive shooters safer with firearms than the majority of the population. I am constantly having my background checked as a PAL holder.

I have small children. Firearm safety is very important to me. My firearms are not a public safety threat and neither am I; neither are my teammates, my family or my friends. The measures this government is taking will destroy competitive shooting sports in Canada. There are so many more than just the narrow few who make it to the Olympics. It will destroy our hunting culture, by which we provide for our own families.

As Canadians, we are all proud to see a Canadian competing on the world stage and bringing home a medal. That will end in the shooting sports because of the bans already put in place or currently being proposed. Removing a tool does not decrease violence. My sports equipment and hunting tools are not public safety threats.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Ms. Kiejko.

We'll go now to Monsieur Renaud, president of the Fédération québécoise des chasseurs et pêcheurs.

Allez-y, s'il vous plaît. You have five minutes.

[Marc Renaud, President, Fédération québécoise des chasseurs et pêcheurs]

Mr. Chair, committee members, I am speaking to you as president of the Fédération québécoise des chasseurs et pêcheurs. The mission of our not-for-profit organization is to represent hunters and anglers and promote safe practices.

Our educational arm, Sécurité nature, has a contract with the government to deliver introductory hunter education courses and the Canadian Firearms Safety Course. Each year, about 60,000 participants take our training.

Ever since we started teaching firearms safety in 1994, the year the course was created, we have always focused on education and prevention rather than gun control. We are doing our part by going above and beyond our training obligations: We carry out firearms safety awareness campaigns, and we provide hunters with a website about safe firearm transportation and storage, along with other one-off initiatives like distributing trigger locks.

Our overall position on gun control is that there should be limited constraints for legitimate gun owners, hunters or sport shooters who have taken training and who hold a possession and acquisition licence.

During the backlash caused by the amendments proposed in November to Bill C‑21, we identified two key issues. The first is that the amendments, as drafted, were not clear enough. The confusion created by the definition of an assault weapon and the list of prohibited weapons shows that this control measure missed the mark. Law-abiding hunters and sport shooters felt justifiably worried about this ban, which could have captured guns that they had been using for years to carry out safe, legal activities.

The second issue is the public's lack of knowledge about firearms, which colours political decision-making. We see that firearms are being placed on the list of prohibited weapons on the basis of aesthetic and ergonomic criteria, rather than objective criteria based on the firearm's capacity. Also, some people see semi-automatic rifles as military weapons, but this mechanism is necessary for certain types of hunting. Let me remind you that magazine capacity is already regulated. Generally speaking, the limit is five cartridges, and in the specific case of migratory bird hunting, the limit is three cartridges under federal law.

We would like the Canadian regulations to focus on the real criminals instead of criminalizing legitimate gun owners.

First, a definition of assault weapon that's based on objective criteria, not the style of the gun, should be created. If the definition is accepted by the majority of the hunting and sport shooting community, it should then be applied retroactively to all the schedules of prohibited firearms. Then it would finally be possible to stop working off lists that are constantly being updated, creating concern and confusion.

In summary, we strongly believe in the power of education and prevention for promoting firearms safety. Our members want to feel safe, too, and they hope new laws intended to improve public safety focus on the right targets. Hunters and sport shooters who comply with the training requirements and get the right licences are the wrong target.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you.

We'll start our rounds of questions now with Ms. Dancho.

Ms. Dancho, please go ahead for six minutes.