Public Safety Committee on April 25th, 2023

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Minister, towards the end of our study, we heard additional testimony on ensuring that manufacturers are regulated to prevent them from exploiting loopholes, which we've seen happen in Canada's firearm classification system.

I know this was an issue that the Danforth families brought up. Their testimony was quite powerful in their exchange with our committee.

Could you talk about the role that manufacturers play and about shifting the onus onto them to ensure that they are compliant with the intent of our firearms laws?

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

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, first I do want to give a shout-out not only to Danforth Families, but also to PolySeSouvient, The Women's Coalition, and so many other groups that we have been working very closely with .

These are people who have been profoundly and tragically impacted as a result of gun violence. It is thanks to them and their advocacy that we are in a position to not only pass this strong legislation but take further additional steps, including around the question of how it is that we classify prohibited firearms, specifically on the question of assault-style firearms.

This is where, with the work of this committee, I believe we can look at an amendment that would see a technical definition that would allow us to pick up and answer the call of the Mass Casualty Commission.

There is work to be done here, and I look forward to doing that work with all parliamentarians.

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Thank you, Minister.

I'd like to ask you a final question.

Several police associations in Quebec recently stated their support for a total ban on assault weapons. This ban would protect citizens, as well as members of these associations who could encounter firearms of this kind in the exercise of their duties.

Minister, how important, in your view, are the concerns of law enforcement agencies, and the prohibition on weapons designed for war rather use by members of Canadian communities?

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

That's a real concern of mine.

As I mentioned in my opening address, I attended funeral services for 10 police officers. It's an unprecedented and extremely difficult time for police communities and for all Canadians.

I'm grateful to the Quebec police associations. They are not the only associations that support us and encourage us to do more and to take further action with respect to policies on assault weapons. I think that we have the opportunity and the responsibility to respond to the call of the commission of inquiry into the carnage in Portapique, Nova Scotia.

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Thank you, Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Mr. Schiefke.

Ms. Michaud, you have the floor for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for coming.

To be honest, I'm rather disappointed. I expected you to announce that you were going to present new amendments for the resumption of the clause‑by‑clause study of Bill C‑21. We've welcomed you today in connection with a study of the effects of the withdrawal of amendments G‑4 and G‑46. I understand that you have resumed work on this and that you have consulted hunters and indigenous communities, among others, which is something you should have done before presenting the amendments. I would have liked to hear what you had to say on the solutions you came up with for finally drawing a clear distinction between weapons used in a military context and those used reasonably for hunting.

You are the last witness we will be receiving, before we resume a clause‑by‑clause study shortly, and I understand that we will still not be receiving any new amendments that would prohibit assault weapons, as you had promised.

Can you confirm otherwise today, to the effect that when we resume the clause‑by‑clause study, the amendments pertaining to the assault weapons ban will have been tabled by your government?

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

You're right. Two things emerged from my consultations with Canadians, including RCMP experts looking into the matter of definitions.

To begin with, the 2020 order in council established two characteristics:

a 20-millimetre bore diameter and a 10,000-joule force.

This order in council prohibited all firearms that exceed these characteristics.

Then there are some physical characteristics, which you previously discussed in connection with the initial amendments. I think it would still be possible to include a number of characteristics of this kind in a technical definition. I remain prepared to work with you and the other members of the committee…

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

So I'm to understand that you're ready to work with the opposition to table some amendments, but are you ready to table them?

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

That's precisely what we're doing now with you and the entire committee.

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

Minister, at the beginning of your address, you described Bill C‑21 to reform firearms laws as extremely sound.

The current bill makes no mention of illegal arms trafficking, exempts certain people from the handgun freeze, and fails to respond to demands from several women's groups that criticize the red flag measure. There is also still no amendment that would prohibit assault weapons.

Would you agree with me that your reform may not be quite that strong?

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

It takes things farther than ever before, Ms. Michaud. The introduction of a national freeze on handguns, for example, is a decision that no previous government in our country's history has ever made.

You're right to say that there have been concerns about the red flag and yellow flag measures, but I think we've dealt with a number of those. For criminals who traffic in firearms, there are stiffer penalties. We are also prepared to come up with other technical tools for the police, such as wiretapping and surveillance authorizations.

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

Minister, one of the reasons for the unpopularity of amendments G‑4 and G‑46 was the fact that they were impossible to understand. There was a lot of confusion over the various lists of prohibited and exempted firearms. The Bloc Québécois requested a clear definition of a military-style assault weapon. There shouldn't be a list. The definition should include not only weapons currently available on the market but also those entering the market in the future.

Can we, legally and legislatively speaking, come up with a definition that would not require adding a list to the Criminal Code? In any event, such a list would not be updated. It's understood that the only list of prohibited weapons would be the RCMP's. So what's the point of including a list in the Criminal Code?

Further to your consultations, are you certain that you can provide a new definition of a military-style assault weapon?

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

For no list, the short answer is yes.

I received a lot of feedback on the issue of the list. There are many concerns about the language used. It's highly technical and rather long. I believe that the best way to come up with a very strong policy, without a list, is via a technical definition. Working together with you and other members of the committee, we can come up with one.

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

Do you agree with me that including—in black and white—the expression “fusil de chasse” in the French version of a bill might be confusing to those to whom we have said that hunting weapons would not be included.

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

I totally agree.

That was one the stated concerns. The expression “arme de chasse” is “hunting gun” in English. It's controversial.

I think we could use clearer language out of respect for Canada's hunters.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you.

We go now to Mr. Julian. Please go ahead for six minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for coming today.

As Ms. Michaud just said, your presence and the discussions we've had are important, because we're about to resume the clause‑by‑clause study of Bill C‑21 and we don't want a second failure. The first version of the definition had clearly failed before Christmas. Fortunately, it was withdrawn.

Now the issue of manufacturers is one of the important things you mentioned in your presentation. As you very well know, some organizations like PolySeSouvient identified a number loopholes for manufacturers. We can identify military-style assault weapons, but there's no logical compulsory process for manufacturers of new models. Some new models might be made specifically with a view to circumventing the law. Manufacturers therefore have a major responsibility.

Could you talk to us about the current process and about what could be tightened up to eliminate these loopholes?

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

Thank you for the question, Mr. Julian.

I think you've made a very good point, which is that it's the firearms manufacturers' responsibility.

First of all, a way has to be found to involve the manufacturers in firearms regulatory and classification efforts, including firearms classified as assault weapons.

I think the way we can do this, Mr. Julian, is by engaging directly with manufacturers to make sure they understand that there is a responsibility to submit firearms for classification. By doing that, we can move away from the obligation being on not only law enforcement but on gun owners themselves. I think there is an opportunity to look at an amendment that will strengthen Bill C-21 so that manufacturers are required to work with law enforcement in the classification of firearms, including on the important point of those firearms that may fall under a definition of a firearm prohibited as an assault-style firearm.

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

In your statement you also touched on the issue of ghost guns. As the new kid on the block here at the public safety committee, I've been speaking with law enforcement. People in law enforcement have raised broad concerns about the dramatic increase in some sectors across the country in the number of ghost guns, untraceable weapons, that are being produced.

In one of the meetings, a law enforcement officer said that they can walk into a basement where there is a 3D printer that is legally obtained and find legally obtained firearm components. There is ammunition on the premises as well. That person does not have a PAL and hasn't gone through a process, yet all of these aspects are legal until the untraceable firearm is produced. To what extent is this a problem?

We feel very strongly in this corner of this committee room that we have to be tackling ghost guns in a very proactive way.

Do you see it as a problem? Do you have the statistics there? Do you feel that this is an aspect that needs to be addressed?

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

Absolutely, and I want to thank you for raising this as well.

Ghost guns are the next generation of guns that are being used by criminals expressly for criminal purposes. There is no legitimate or lawful purpose for a ghost gun. It is designed to evade the long arm of the law because they're easily discarded and extremely difficult, if not impossible, to trace.

Therefore, I commend any work that you or any other member of this committee may wish to bring forward in the form of an amendment that will help us to take additional concrete steps to make ghost gun technology for guns illegal, either through the constituent parts or through other avenues.

On the last point, I know there have been questions raised about investigations that may be carried out in which officers seize upon ghost gun technology or ghost guns themselves in conjunction with ammunition that could then be used in a ghost gun. I can assure you, having looked very closely at the Criminal Code and dusting off my federal prosecutor's hat, there are provisions under the Criminal Code that deal with that scenario.

However, that shouldn't in any way detract from our opportunity and responsibility to deal with the question of ghost guns. I encourage the committee to think about that in the coming days when you get to the amendments and clause-by-clause stages. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

You have 15 seconds.

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

I have a quick question.

One of the problems with the amendments that were brought forward before Christmas was that there was no consultation with organizations representing indigenous peoples. To what extent have you been consulting over the course of the last few months?

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

Briefly, Mr. Chair, it's extensively. We've engaged with national indigenous organizations. We've engaged with rights holders and communities. I've mentioned some of them. I'm happy to elaborate on that work later on in my appearance.