Public Safety Committee on May 10th, 2023

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

Thank you very much.

In which way is that different from G-27? It's a different part of the Criminal Code.

[Rachel Mainville-Dale]

This is a new clause to add.... This was not something that was originally foreseen in Bill C-21. However, when the decision was made to make amendments for ghost guns, including firearm parts, it's adding all of those consequential amendments to various parts of the Criminal Code.

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

On that point, just to confirm, the original format of Bill C-21 that we had before these amendments were introduced did not include provisions on ghost guns. Is that correct?

[Rachel Mainville-Dale]

That's correct.

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

It was not a priority of Bill C-21 to do anything concerning ghost guns. Is that correct?

[Rachel Mainville-Dale]

I cannot speak to questions on the government's priorities.

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

The priority of ghost guns was not reflected in Bill C-21 in any way prior to these amendments being introduced.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Again, the witnesses can't speak to that matter.

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

I'll just try again.

It's just so I'm aware and so people are aware, because ghost guns have been brought up as the primary reason why we need to have this time allocation and why we can only ask five minutes of questions per party, per amendment and per clause.

Ghost guns, ghost guns, ghost guns: We must have heard that a hundred times in the last number of meetings, yet it was not in the primary bill. Is that correct?

[Rachel Mainville-Dale]

The measures with regard to ghost guns were not part of the original bill.

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

Okay.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Those are all of my questions for this amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you.

Mr. Noormohamed.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

I have one brief comment, Mr. Chair.

I think it's important for it to be on the record that part of the process of amendments is to improve legislation. Part of the time that was taken was to ensure the legislation was improved.

The fact that those guns are being added to this legislation at the request, the direction and the behest of law enforcement is something that should not be taken lightly. We should all be embracing that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Mr. Noormohamed.

Are there any further interventions?

Mr. Barrett, please.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Thanks, Chair.

I would say there's a difference between taking something lightly with respect to ghost guns.... If this has been adopted as a priority of the government and then it time allocates the issue of addressing it, that doesn't suggest that [Inaudible—Editor] approach.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

I'm going to interrupt here, again.

I draw all of you to Standing Order 18. In addition to not disrespecting other members and so on and the royal family and all that stuff, it's to not reflect on the decisions of the House.

The House has passed this to us in this form at this time. It did so for whatever reasons were argued and voted on in the House. It does us no good to reflect upon that here today, now.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Am I not allowed to speak about what happens in the House?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Standing Order 18 says we're not supposed to reflect on votes in the House.

The point is that we need to look forward. We need to not question how we got here at this time. Do that wherever you want, but not here. We've voting on this bill—

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

On a point of order, Chair, is this counting towards their five minutes?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Well, as I'm talking, it's not.

Mr. Barrett, go ahead on a point of order.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

With respect to your intervention on my remarks, I've watched many hours of this committee and I've been watching today. I've heard reference to other decisions that have been made in the House, not specific to this particular decision.

That standing order does not expressly prohibit discussion of only this motion that was adopted by the House. If it is the practice of this committee, of which I'm not a regular member, that we can't discuss any decision of the House, then I think that will shape future discussions at this committee quite considerably, including Mr. Julian reflecting before on things that happened eight years ago in the House during his comments to Ms. Dancho.

I just need some clarity on what we're not allowed to say at this committee. I'm not a regular member here, so I didn't appreciate that at SECU you're not allowed to talk about what happens in the House of Commons.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

My comments were not about SECU. They were about the Standing Orders of the House of Commons, to which we are bound.

We have done all kinds of things in all committees that I've been on that have kind of pushed the boundaries sometimes. I'm just trying to get everybody to focus on what we're doing here today. We're trying to get through Bill C‑21.

I'm a night guy, so I'm okay. I can go until four in the morning on Friday; that's fine. If we can be efficient with our time, we can get through this and get it done.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Mr. Chair, on that point of order, could you share with me what the standing order says precisely or perhaps have the clerk read it?

I have been a parliamentarian for five years and this is the first time I've encountered this kind of resistance to what was frankly not a combative remark, but just a simple reply in debate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

I didn't mean it as a combative response either. I'm trying to focus the committee on the work that we're doing here today. Let's not reflect on what happened in the House and so on. Let's just buckle down and get this done.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Could you share that standing order?