Public Safety Committee on April 25th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 62 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security.

We will start by acknowledging that we are meeting on the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin people.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of November 25, 2021. Members are attending in person in the room and remotely by using the Zoom application.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Friday, February 3, 2023, the committee resumed its study of the effects of the withdrawn amendments, G-4 and G-46, to Bill C-21, an act to amend certain acts and to make certain consequential amendments with regard to firearms.

We welcome today, in person, the Minister of Public Safety and high officials from various departments and agencies.

First, we have the Honourable Marco Mendicino, Minister of Public Safety.

Welcome, Minister. Thank you for coming.

We have, from the Canada Border Services Agency, Mr. Daniel Anson, director general, intelligence and investigations. From the Department of Justice is Mr. Matthew Taylor, general counsel and director, criminal law policy division. From the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness is Mr. Talal Dakalbab, senior assistant deputy minister, crime prevention branch. From the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, we have Mr. Bryan Larkin, deputy commissioner, specialized policing services, and Ms. Kellie Paquette, director general, Canadian firearms program.

Thank you all for joining us today.

I'll note that the minister will be with us for the first hour and that the remaining officials will stay for the second hour as well.

Welcome to everyone.

I now invite the minister to make an opening statement.

Please go ahead, sir.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm pleased to return to this committee to discuss Bill C-21 and the broader actions the government is taking to reduce gun violence.

This bill basically aims at keeping Canadians safe. It flows from the promise we made to Canadians to combat violence and crimes committed with firearms by removing weapons designed for battlefields from our streets.

Bill C-21, Mr. Chair, is the strongest gun reform legislation this country has seen in a generation. It implements a national freeze on handguns, the number one type of gun used in homicides. It addresses the alarming role of firearms in domestic violence through our red and yellow flag laws and it will raise maximum sentences against gun traffickers from 10 years to 14 years.

We're committed to getting this right and getting this legislation passed for all Canadians. To do that, we need to engage people, and that is exactly what we have been doing.

We've met hunters, firearms experts, indigenous peoples, and Canadians in rural and northern regions, to hear what they have to say and in order to get a better understanding of the role firearms play in the everyday lives of many people.

I've heard from indigenous communities that hunt to feed their families, to protect themselves and to preserve their traditions. I've met with gun owners from right across the country, and most recently in Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, Yukon and Northwest Territories, where hunting is not only recreational but also something that is passed on from one generation to the next.

Of course, Mr. Chair, I have the sober responsibility of grieving with family members and communities who have been devastated by gun violence. I have consoled families in Nova Scotia, Quebec City, Montreal, Surrey and in my own hometown of Toronto. I have attended the funerals of 10 police officers. We owe it to them. Every member of this committee, every member of Parliament and every parliamentarian owes it to them to keep going.

We just marked the third anniversary of the shooting tragedy in Portapique and Truro, Nova Scotia. I joined the Prime Minister to receive the final report of the Mass Casualty Commission and to grieve with the families.

Mr. Chair, one of the recommendations to emerge from the final report called on the government to strengthen the national ban on assault-style firearms, which we put into place in 2020. It's not just the Mass Casualty Commission; it's law enforcement, survivors and victims, as well as the vast majority of Canadians, who support taking action against a type of firearm that, let's be clear, was designed to inflict the greatest number of fatalities possible in the shortest period of time.

We need to continue this work by implementing our comprehensive plan to prevent further tragedies. An intelligent policy is only one part of our comprehensive plan to protect Canadians against crimes committed with firearms. Our plan rests on three pillars.

Our plan includes strong borders to stop the flow of illegal guns, backed by a $450-million investment into border security in the last two years alone. Last year, the CBSA and RCMP seized a record number of illegal firearms at the border, but we need to continue that progress.

Another part of our plan is strong prevention through our investments in stopping crime and violence before it starts. This begins with our $250-million building safer communities fund, a program that is designed to help set up success for young people who are at greatest risk by advancing their educations and their careers so they can make positive contributions to our communities.

Initiatives like 902 Man Up in Halifax, which I have had the pleasure of visiting with, are making an incredible difference, and they are just one of the many organizations right across the country that are benefiting from this initiative.

Our national crime prevention strategy and the gun and gang violence action fund are two more examples of how we are stopping gun crime before it starts.

Finally, Mr. Chair, there are the strong gun laws and the keystone legislation that are before you right now in the form of Bill C-21.

It's purpose is to prevent another tragedy like those at the École polytechnique, Dawson College, Portapique and Truro. Canadians firmly support our prohibition on assault-style firearms, and the historic tabling of Bill C‑21.

We bring solutions, not slogans, to make sure that all Canadians can feel safe at home.

Striking the right balance to meet the goals I have outlined today while working with this Parliament is something that we remain committed to doing. Together we now have both an opportunity and a responsibility to not only pass this bill in its current form but to strengthen it.

Mr. Chair, I look forward to supporting amendments that will address the assault-style rifle ban, as the Mass Casualty Commission's final report called on us to do, along with other priorities that deal with ghost guns and, indeed, the responsibilities of manufacturers to play their role in keeping our communities safe.

Mr. Chair, in conclusion, Canadians are counting on us to do this work responsibly, based on facts, not fear, and I hope all of my colleagues will contribute to a constructive dialogue today

I now look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Minister.

We will start our first round of questions with Ms. Dancho.

Ms. Dancho, please go ahead for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister and staff, for being with us today on this important matter.

Minister, it has been a while that we have been waiting for you to come to this committee for these consultations. It's six weeks since we wrapped up our consultations.

I know that when you first introduced this bill almost a year ago, you took the position that you wanted this bill passed as quickly as possible, and then, when it came to committee in the late fall, Liberal members on this committee were insistent that we pass this bill within a week. Now this is months later, and you have made us wait six weeks for you to come here.

I do appreciate that you're here now to answer our questions.

You mentioned in your opening remarks that a cornerstone of your legislation in Bill C-21 is to combat gun traffickers, which is something I deeply support. I think that law enforcement also supports that. As you know, the Toronto Police Service has said that almost nine out of 10 guns used in crimes in Toronto are smuggled from the United States. Collectively, police have told us and you that this is a primary focus, and should be, for fighting gun violence in this country.

I appreciate that Bill C-21, based on your remarks, is attempting to do that. I know you have talked on national television about how this bill will strengthen—your words—penalties for gun traffickers from their 10-year maximum sentence to 14 years.

How common is it now to sentence someone to 10 years, the current maximum? How common is that now?

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

Thank you for outlining the work that I have been engaged with over the last six weeks and indeed right back to when we tabled this bill. I have heard loudly and clearly from Canadians from every walk of life, including from gun owners, first nations communities and Canadians, about what they expect out of this bill, which is smart gun laws.

You have asked me about maximum sentences. I have worked on the front lines of the criminal justice system as a federal prosecutor. I will tell you that I have confidence in the judiciary to exercise good judgment when it comes to making sure that we separate those gun traffickers from our communities when we need to do so—

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

I apologize for interrupting, but since your government formed in 2015, how common is the current maximum of 10 years? How common is that right now, since you formed government in 2015?

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

Ms. Dancho—

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

Is it common at all? Does it happen quite a bit?

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

—every single case is taken on its facts. I have confidence in the judiciary to use the higher maximum sentences to make sure that gun traffickers who terrorize our communities with guns—

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

I appreciate that. Okay.

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

—are separated from the communities so that we can keep our communities safe.

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

I would hope that would be the case, certainly, given how many lives are being taken and given how important it is that we tackle gun smuggling. I would agree with the statement you made; however, the information that your office has provided to my office is that since the Liberals formed government in 2015, not one person has been awarded the current 10-year maximum sentence. It is frustrating to see you talk on national television, here today and in question period to our questions about how you're getting tough on gun traffickers and increasing the maximum to 14 years when the current sentence of 10 years has never been used since your Prime Minister formed government a few years ago.

I just feel that it's really a non-starter. It's really not going to do a lot to combat this issue, unfortunately. That part of Bill C-21 isn't going to make that much of an impact, given that the maximum 10-year sentence has never been used since the Liberals formed government a few years ago.

I want to move on to the red flag provisions.

To be honest, this is an area that I was looking forward to. As you'll recall, I asked that this be split from the bill so that we can take the politics out of it and look to support the red flag provisions. You were in the chamber at that time. You did not allow me to split that out of there.

We found in our testimony that the Canadian Bar Association; the National Association of Women and the Law, which was a Liberal witness; domestic violence groups from Quebec; and also three chiefs and vice-chiefs we invited to committee did not want those red flag laws passed in this bill. They did not support them. They're the very groups that I would have imagined would have supported them, because they were supposed to be for vulnerable groups and women in domestic violence situations. That's why I was interested in supporting them off the bat, yet we've heard first-hand that they're no good.

In fact, the quotes were quite damning. The women's group said that it would prohibit extremely quick action that is essential to preventing femicide and is likely to be risky and impractical for women whose safety is at risk. It also said that it would do more harm than good for women impacted by this. The indigenous groups mentioned that racism could play a factor and that the red flag laws could be abused. If someone just doesn't like you in a first nation, they can have your guns apprehended.

That is the impression that your red flag laws in this bill have given the public: They don't seem to be any good. It's frustrating, because there's not a lot in this bill that we can really talk about. You already passed the handgun ban through regulation in the fall. That major “keystone”, as you called it, in Bill C-21 has already been accomplished by your government.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

You have one minute.

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

Thank you.

In looking at the bill, we don't see a lot in there, and yet this has been holding up the good work of this committee for quite some time. As you know, there are about four or five inches' worth of amendments on Bill C-21 that we still have to do, as well as clause-by-clause study. There are only two months left, Minister, and you've made us wait six weeks. You also have two other bills in the chamber waiting to come to this committee.

That's not to mention that there has been a 32% increase in violent crime, as you are well aware, since your government took office seven years ago. Of that crime, less than half of one percentage point is committed by long guns, and yet your government chose to divide Canadians with the amendments that you've recently withdrawn.

It's really not clear to me what Bill C-21 is going to accomplish. Reasonably, I think we can understand if you would withdraw this bill. I'm just wondering, to conclude, if that's part of your plan, Minister.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Ms. Dancho, your time is up, but we will allow the minister a minute to respond.

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

I would ask for some discretion from the chair, because Ms. Dancho did speak for approximately three minutes, and there are some very important points there. I'm happy to stretch out my visit to this committee to accommodate other members who may wish to also use their time.

First, Ms. Dancho, I fundamentally disagree. There is a lot of good policy in this bill, including the national handgun freeze, which you and your party oppose.

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

You've already accomplished that through regulation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Ms. Dancho, the minister has the floor.

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

For how much time are you going to let him speak?

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair. In fairness, if I may be permitted to answer the numerous substantive points—Ms. Dancho has raised some good questions—I think Canadians have a right to hear the answers from the government.

I disagree; there is good policy in here, including the national handgun freeze and including the red flag and yellow flag laws. On balance, we have heard the concerns of a number of advocacy groups. We have made some modifications to the red flag provisions so that we can ensure that there is protection for those who come forward and avail themselves of another layer of protection.

There's a last thing I want to say with regard to the sentencing provisions. I share the concern that Ms. Dancho articulates around maximum sentences. By raising maximum sentences, we are sending a very strong signal to the courts that for those who do terrorize our communities with guns, there should be higher sentences. That is a far better approach than the failed Conservative Party policies around sentencing and mandatory minimum penalties and the overreach of the Conservative Party on MMPs, which have been systematically struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Minister.

Mr. Schiefke, you have the floor now for six minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for coming, Minister. We're very pleased to see you here.

Minister, you've been conducting consultations on the definition of “assault weapon” for several months now. I'd like to thank you, on behalf of all the citizens of my Vaudreuil—Soulanges riding, for your tireless work on this matter.

What are your main conclusions at this stage?

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

Thank you for the question, Mr. Schiefke.

Mr. Chair, my conclusion is that Canadians are truly concerned about firearms violence. That's why our government came up with a comprehensive plan based on three pillars. One of these pillars is presenting sound policies.

In 2020, for example, the government prohibited access to assault-style firearms. These are weapons designed for military use, on the battlefield, in times of war.

In its final report, the Mass Casualty Commission recommended that the government strengthen this national ban.

I hope that the committee members will propose an amendment that will allow this work to move forward.

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

Am I right in saying that you agree with the firearms specialists and victims' rights organizations like PolySeSouvient, who have asked for a definition of an assault weapon. Is that correct?

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

Absolutely.

The process of classifying firearms has also been handled by our colleagues at the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, in the firearms registration director's office.

I believe that a technical definition that includes the physical characteristics of firearms would enhance the process. That needs to be done in partnership with the industry. The industry also has a responsibility to contribute to this work.