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.
9 p.m.
Liberal
9 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Please carry on with the vote.
(Amendment agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Thank you. I would say that passed. BQ-3 carries.
We'll go now to BQ-4.
Ms. Michaud, you have the floor.
9 p.m.
Bloc
Kristina Michaud Bloc Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First of all, I thank my colleagues for voting in favour of amendment BQ‑3. I'm very happy to see that my colleagues understand the full importance of this change. I think the Danforth Families for Safe Communities group will be fully satisfied.
As I was saying, amendment BQ-4 is a consequential amendment to the previous one. Everyone should therefore be in favour, without any issues. Incidentally, I want to thank members of the committee for the constructive discussion we just had. All parties asked very interesting questions about the previous amendment.
The amendment relates somewhat to the issue of magazines. I'll seize the opportunity to remind everyone that it wasn't possible to prohibit large-capacity magazines in this bill, but the Minister of Public Safety committed to doing so. I expect that promise to be kept, to actually prohibit large-capacity magazines altered so they cannot hold more than the number of cartridges allowed by law.
Thank you.
9:05 p.m.
Liberal
9:05 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
Thank you very much, Chair.
Officials, I have some questions. This is substantively different from the previous amendment, because it talks about....
Let me back up first. Is “cartridge magazines” the only addition to this one?
9:05 p.m.
Acting Director General, Firearms Policy, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
9:05 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
Okay. This is in relation to automatic firearms, not semi-automatic ones, and automatic firearms are already prohibited in Canada.
9:05 p.m.
Acting Director General, Firearms Policy, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
It's the addition of “cartridge magazines” to this purpose provision in terms of authorizing importation and exportation of all the devices—all of the things that are listed—in paragraph 4(c) of the Firearms Act. Cartridge magazines can be found in manual firearms as much as in semi-automatic firearms and as much as in automatic firearms.
9:05 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
With “to authorize, notably by sections 35 to 73”, we're talking about the importation and export of cartridges. We're adding magazines to this.
What impact does that have on what we're trying to do on public safety? Help me understand this.
This act effectively, in layman's terms, will require magazines. It doesn't say large-capacity magazines, but it says, “magazines and components and parts designed exclusively for use in the manufacture of or assembly into automatic firearms”.
I'm a little concerned with the “automatic firearms” part. Automatic firearms are prohibited. They are a prohibited firearm already.
9:05 p.m.
Acting Director General, Firearms Policy, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
There are some automatic firearms that are grandfathered, because they were prohibited, and the decisions from governments at that time were to grandfather them. Those people...I'm not sure how many of them are left. I don't have the numbers with me at this time, but in terms of regulating or controlling the import and export for those purposes....
9:05 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
Can my friend from the RCMP firearms program confirm that what we're talking about here, automatic firearms, are prohibited in Canada already? Is that correct?
May 10th, 2023 / 9:05 p.m.
Rob Mackinnon Director, Canadian Firearms Program, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Yes, they are. They were prohibited in 1978, but as Rachel stated, anybody who was in possession of a prohibited fully-automatic firearm was able to keep it in their possession, and there is a restriction associated to the grandfathering provision.
9:05 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
Is this a restriction to the grandfathering provision?
9:05 p.m.
Acting Director General, Firearms Policy, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
I will add that in terms of “components and parts designed exclusively”, the automatic firearm goes towards that part of the sentence. The cartridge magazines import and export is not included as part of...because it's not a “components and parts designed exclusively for”. It's part of that list.
9:05 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
It's on this list, but it doesn't apply. It reads into the same...the importation and exportation of all these things including a magazine “and components and parts designed exclusively”. It doesn't say “or”. It's all one sentence. You can't break it out.
9:05 p.m.
Acting Director General, Firearms Policy, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
The use of the word “and” before that separates it from the list.
9:05 p.m.
Conservative
9:05 p.m.
Acting Director General, Firearms Policy, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Pardon me.
9:05 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
The “and” is not before “magazines”. The “and” is after.
9:05 p.m.
Acting Director General, Firearms Policy, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
That's right—“and components and parts designed”. The “components and parts” are “designed exclusively for...the manufacture of or assembly into automatic....”
9:05 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
I would disagree. I think some officials at your table might disagree, because when you read that, the “and” doesn't separate what was said above. It's an addition to what's said above. It's not a disconnect.
Trust me, I'm not an English grammar teacher, but I will tell you that the way that reads, it's an addition to what we said above, including magazines, for importation, for exportation and for exclusive use in the manufacture and assembly of automatic firearms—automatic, not semi-automatic—which are already prohibited in this country.
I'm trying to understand. This could have an impact for a lot of people, if we don't understand exactly what we're trying to do here. I'm trying to get clarity. This is a substantial difference. Will it actually have an impact on public safety? I don't know, because these things are already supposed to be....
We're talking about a large-capacity magazine. My friends from the RCMP will confirm that large-capacity magazines are already prohibited for a fully automatic firearm.
9:10 p.m.
Acting Director General, Firearms Policy, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
This provision doesn't talk about large-capacity magazines. It talks about cartridge—
9:10 p.m.
Liberal
9:10 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
I thought you said you woke up as the night went on.
