Public Safety Committee on May 4th, 2023

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

It is absolutely appropriate, Mr. Chair, to speak of the time that has been spent on this amendment, as the member knows.

The amendment itself is seven sentences. It was received days ago. I recall getting a 500-page omnibus legislation during the Harper government years, which we were debating 24 hours later. Now we're days later and a seven-sentence amendment is not being moved through at a time when we have 145 other amendments waiting after that. It is pretty clear to me that what we're experiencing is a full-on filibuster. Given the size and scope of the important issue around ghost guns and what law enforcement is calling for, I think it's a real problem. We'll have to find other solutions to this filibuster.

On the amendment itself, I thank the officials. They've been very clear in terms of answering the questions. To my mind, in some cases, we're talking about questions that have been repeated, or they're rhetorical. Hypothetically, when we know we have legislation and regulations follow, things are implemented. To get to the point where we're asking questions that are more proper for the latter stages, after the passing of legislation.... I don't feel that is the right way to go.

I flag the incredible amount of time it has taken this week, at a time when the committee should be moving forward. If the Conservatives are not willing to schedule additional committee meetings, I think we have to find other solutions to this.

I'll be voting in favour of this amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Mr. Julian.

I will now go over to Ms. Michaud.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm obviously disappointed that my subamendment was not carried. I would nonetheless like to say that the definition that we have before us is acceptable, and for that reason I will vote in favour of the amendment tabled by the government.

I hope that my colleagues have received answers to their questions and that they will be ready to vote soon on the amendment. I would reiterate, as Mr. Julian has just done, that quite a few people have been waiting for these amendments for a long time. It would be wonderful if our study of the bill could progress quickly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you.

We'll go to Mr. Lloyd, followed by Ms. Damoff.

Go ahead, Mr. Lloyd.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Perhaps Ms. Damoff's intervention might not be necessary, but we'll see.

The Conservative position is that this definition remains flawed for many reasons, including the reasons eloquently brought up by my colleague Mr. Calkins. There is some uncertainty in this definition. The definition also leaves it open that hunting rifles and shotguns will be banned on a go-forward basis.

Also, this government has seemingly left the door open through a proposed advisory council and a mandated parliamentary review on a definition. We don't know what those will recommend, but it's certainly leaving the door open for a future revised definition that would go forward and ban hunting rifles and shotguns. We should remember what the Prime Minister said not too long ago, which was, “[T]here are some guns...that we're going to have to take away” that are used for hunting purposes.

Conservatives will continue to hold this Liberal government to account. We will continue to stand up for law-abiding hunters and sport shooters so that their hunting rifles and shotguns will not be taken away.

In order to assuage the concerns Mr. Julian has brought up on numerous occasions, I will say that Conservatives are ready to vote on this matter.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Mr. Lloyd.

Ms. Damoff.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I just want to get on the record and clarify that this amendment in front of us will not ban hunting rifles. To speculate on future firearms that may or may not be banned and give the impression that we're trying to ban hunting rifles, ban.... These are firearms that don't exist.

There tend to be clips that get out there, often including me, that then give the impression that we're doing something we're not. We are not banning hunting rifles. I want to be very clear on that.

I want to thank colleagues for the work they've put in to this. I'm pleased to hear that we're going to get to a vote, so I will end it there.

I would like a recorded vote, though, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Mr. Clerk, would you carry out the vote, please?

(Amendment agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Thank you, all. The motion carries. I know we all have the bruises. Thank you all for getting us there.

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

Good. Can we go home?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Wouldn't that be nice?

Okay. In that vein, we have until six, but I think if we go to 5:45 p.m., it will be the full two hours that we were allocated.

Is that okay with everyone?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Okay.

Carrying on, next on our list is NDP-0.1. I will note that if this motion is adopted, BQ-2 and CPC-2 cannot be moved, because they affect the same line.

We have Mr. Julian, please.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I'll be brief.

I will flag that the original NDP member of this committee, Alistair MacGregor, proposed this amendment, and it is his birthday today. I hope that is additional incentive for members of the committee. I'm sure he would be pleased, as would the airsoft community.

We're talking about very serious issues here. We have the framework, in terms of this bill. I've mentioned previously the issues around airsoft, the issues around the manufacturers' loopholes, which would be tightened up with the amendment that we just adopted. These are important and serious issues.

What has been flagged by the airsoft community—and these are folks who enjoy airsoft in a recreational way—is the concerns around the bill's treating them in what is really not an appropriate way.

The intent of the amendment would be to take clause 1 out, and basically that still allows the government to look at a possible regulatory approach. We understand that the government has the ability to set regulations. Members of the airsoft community have been very open, as you know, Mr. Chair, in coming before this committee, and in talking with members of this committee to say they're open to regulations around airsoft, but the reality is that the current clause 1 would have a serious impact on airsoft practitioners, as well as a number of businesses across the country.

On behalf of Alistair MacGregor, who has been a strong champion of those who are airsoft practitioners, I'd like to move the amendment. Hopefully it will receive support from all members of this committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Mr. Julian.

Is there any discussion on this amendment?

Ms. Damoff, go ahead.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I want to thank Mr. Julian on behalf of Mr. MacGregor. I know he did a lot of work on this.

I would like to give a shout-out to the airsoft industry, which was incredibly willing to work with us to regulate the industry.

I have concerns about gas-powered airsoft rifles. It was something we saw at the gun vault. I have concerns about their ability to be converted.

While we won't be able to support the amendment, we won't stand in your way.

My understanding is that the government can provide regulations on the issues that you mentioned, Mr. Julian. The industry came here and told us that they're fine if we look at regulating age, transportation and storage. They don't want these airsoft to get into the hands of kids, be taken to a school and used to kill a child because they're carrying their parent's airsoft rifle.

I want to thank the industry sincerely, because they were incredibly good to work with. They were very concise and came with solutions.

Thank you for bringing this forward, Mr. Julian.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Ms. Michaud, over to you.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank Mr. Julian for tabling this amendment, as well as Mr. MacGregor, with whom the committee had worked previously on this important issue.

As Ms. Damoff stated, when we visited the RCMP's vault, we were able to see how easy it is to convert an airgun into a real firearm, because the components of a firearm fit easily into the housings of an air gun. However, as my colleagues have mentioned, I think it would be a step too far to prohibit air guns in bill C‑21.

Moreover, when industry representatives came to testify before the committee, they were very conciliatory and said they were open to the idea that the industry be regulated. I will quote part of the opening statement given by Mr. Brian McIlmoyle, the director of ASIC, the Airsoft in Canada association, when he testified before the committee:

We believe the best means to mitigate these risks is an 18‑plus restriction on the purchase of airsoft, which would prevent children from buying airsoft without parental knowledge. In addition, a legal acknowledgment of risk or waiver, when signed and combined with some clear educational material, will impress upon parents and young adults the importance and very mortal responsibility of owning airsoft gear.

He also stated that he was willing to go further and made the following proposal:

[...], ASIC has studied a self-regulatory system similar to the United Kingdom's Airsoft Retailers Association and the UK's Violent Crime Reduction Act, which stipulates membership in an airsoft association in order to possess airsoft. This kind of measure would require a higher administrative overhead, but there is a feasible appetite for it within our community.

To which he added:

These measures benefit from joint positions with the FSAQ, or Fédération Sportive d'Airsoft du Québec; the AABC, Airsoft Association of British Columbia; and the CSAAA, the Canadian Sporting Arms and Ammunition Association.

By the way, I would just like to thank the FSAQ, which helped us in our work.

Mr. McIlmoyle ended his presentation with this:

We suggest that this committee empower the Governor in Council to work with consulted bodies such as ASIC to more comprehensively and exhaustively defined “ replica firearm” and/or “airsoft” through regulation. We hope today that the committee can work with our community to develop a solution.

I now have a question for the public servants.

Are you able to confirm that the government is currently able to regulate airsoft guns without these guns being expressly mentioned in bill C‑21? Is there something in the bill right how that would allow the government to regulate airsoft guns?

[Rachel Mainville-Dale, Acting Director General, Firearms Policy, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Thank you for the question.

We would have to undertake an in-depth analysis to determine what the framework is, what political will exists and what activities should be regulated.

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

Is it doable?

[Rachel Mainville-Dale]

Everything is doable when the political will is there.

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

Thank you.

I was thinking about tabling a subamendment to allow the government to regulate airsoft guns, but I have just been told that this is already possible. I will therefore vote in favour of Mr. Julian's amendment.

That said, I want to say quite clearly to the airsoft community that I was going to table precisely the same amendment in order to withdraw any reference to airsoft in bill C‑21.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

I'm sorry, were you moving an amendment?

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

No, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

No. Okay. I apologize.

Go ahead, Mr. Lloyd, if you please.

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

Thank you. This is going to be a question for officials.

I note that the legislation that it is seeking to amend draws the distinction between “replica” firearms and “antique” firearms, so it does not apply to antique firearms, as far as I understand it. The definition of an antique firearm is a firearm that was produced before 1898. That seems to be the date.

We received witness testimony, a brief, from the Toronto Artillery Foundation. It operates a number of old, World War II era, post-1898, 25-pounder cannons that are used for public ceremonial purposes. I think these have tremendous value for ceremonies. We have the 21-gun salute here on Parliament Hill as a tourist attraction.

I just want to get some explanation from the witnesses here. Does this impact those 25-pounder...would they be classified as firearms? They wouldn't be given an exemption under “antique”. What is the state of those cannons in this amendment?