Evidence of meeting #66 for Public Safety and National Security in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
7:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Are there any further interventions?
Seeing none, I'll ask the clerk to conduct a recorded vote.
(Amendment agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
That finishes clause 14.
Shall clause 14 as amended carry?
7:30 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
7:30 p.m.
Conservative
7:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
I think we've had the vote now. It is obviously carried. Let's carry on with that.
We'll go now to new clause 14.1, and we have amendment G-40.
May 10th, 2023 / 7:35 p.m.
Liberal
7:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
We go to amendment G-40.1 in the name of Ms. Damoff.
Ms. Damoff, please go ahead.
7:35 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Thanks, Chair.
I just want to point out that it has taken us over three and a half hours to have 26 votes on these amendments. Every single one of them was a coordinating amendment on ghost guns and firearm parts.
These were non-controversial amendments. There will be other ones coming forward where I'm sure we'll want to have some discussion and dialogue. It's disappointing it's taken us three and a half hours on ones we all agreed on unanimously.
The amendment before us is G-40.1. It deals with prohibited firearms. It was the definition we passed earlier in G-3.1. It's the definition of a ghost gun. This amendment will provide guidance on how that updated definition should be used in criminal proceedings which have already commenced and are before the courts before the new definition comes into force.
I'll put that before you, Chair.
7:35 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
First of all, I'll respond to the comments made by Ms. Damoff on the time it's taking us. We were moving through this bill rather well until the Liberals decided it wasn't going fast enough for them. For whatever reason, we had to rush this through, an ideological and undemocratic process that will not have an impact on public safety to the degree that we all hoped. The fact we're being diligent and trying to understand the bill so that Canadians can understand the impact it will have them is important, contrary to the belief of my colleague across the way.
I would like to ask the officials a question, Mr. Chair.
It's called a transitional provision. I get that. We are adding a definition which was talked about in subsection 84(1). There was a new definition of a prohibited firearm. That new definition includes ghost guns, but not specifically, right?
7:35 p.m.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
Amendment G-40.1 includes an amendment, paragraph (e), which is what it's referring to in this transitional amendment. That adds unlawfully manufactured firearms to the definition of prohibited firearm. That's what is being referred to in the transitional amendment.
Transitional provisions are there to help guide criminal justice system actors to understand what laws govern the facts which form the basis of proceedings. This transitional provision will assist criminal justice actors, when the bill comes into force, or if these provisions come into force. It would be with respect to ongoing proceedings as a result of that paragraph, those newly prohibited firearms.
7:35 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
In layman's terms, if there is a matter before the courts, it wouldn't necessarily be before the courts, because once it's before the courts, it would be too late. If an offence has been committed, the police may charge somebody and they go to court, but if they are not yet in court, this provision can be applied to that process. If they are already in court, or had an appearance already in court for trial, this provision could not be put forward. Is that what I'm hearing you say?
7:35 p.m.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
The provision relates to proceedings under the Criminal Code. When the proceedings commence, that would be a proceeding under the Criminal Code.
Sandro, did you want to add something?
7:35 p.m.
Counsel, Department of Justice
A substantive criminal matter commences when an information is laid before the court. That's the formal instance under section 504 of the Criminal Code, when a proceeding begins. That's your test for whether or not the transitional is triggered. If an information has already been laid before the court in order to commence proceedings, it wouldn't apply. If that has yet to happen, it would.
7:40 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
It's a nuanced line which says an offence may have been committed already, but no charges have yet been laid. The police can still go back and lay that charge. That process can then go through the courts. If, however, an information has been laid prior to this coming into effect, the individuals, even though they may have been responsible for manufacturing a firearm, would not be charged with that manufacturing a firearm offence based on this new definition.
7:40 p.m.
Conservative
7:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Are there any further interventions?
Mr. Lawrence, you have one minute.
7:40 p.m.
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON
Just for clarity, once again, for the viewers watching at home, this would seek to capture what we talked about earlier, what a ghost gun is. Those folks who put those two parts we talked about.... I cannot remember which ones they were, but I'm sure you guys know. That's what this is meant to capture, those ghost guns we talked about earlier.
Is that correct?
7:40 p.m.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
It's not the parts, necessarily. What this amendment does is provide a transitional provision for illegally manufactured firearms.
If someone, for example, manufactured an illegal firearm prior to the coming into force of this provision, it could be non-restricted, restricted or prohibited. Following the coming into force of this bill, if passed, the firearm would be a prohibited firearm. In any proceedings after the coming into force, that firearm would be prohibited and therefore subject to higher penalties.
7:40 p.m.
Conservative
7:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Yes, you are.
That being the case, let us carry on with the vote. I am going to assume we want a recorded division.
(Amendment agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
I'd like to comment that Mr. Lawrence's optimism about anybody out there still watching is very admirable.
We'll carry on to G-40.2, in the name of Ms. Damoff.
7:40 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Thank you, Chair.
This amendment provides that the new technical definition we passed as a committee with G-3.2 be reviewed five years after the day the definition is enacted. It would be commenced by a committee of the House of Commons that may be designated or established by the House, so it could be referred here. The House could determine to send it to another committee.
In essence, it establishes a five-year statutory review of the technical definition we passed.
