Evidence of meeting #8 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 chair.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Clerk of the Committee  Mr. Wassim Bouanani
Evelyn Fox  Founder, Communities for Zero Violence
Richard Miller  Founder, Keep6ix
Heidi Rathjen  Coordinator, PolySeSouvient
Wendy Cukier  President, Coalition for Gun Control
Marcell Wilson  Founder, One By One Movement Inc.
Boufeldja Benabdallah  Spokesman, Centre culturel islamique de Québec

February 15th, 2022 / 11:25 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Jim Carr

Good morning, everybody. I call this meeting to order.

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

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 using the Zoom application. The proceedings will be made available via the House of Commons website. The website will always show the person speaking rather than the entirety of the committee.

For members participating in person, proceed as you usually would when the whole committee is meeting in person in a committee room. Keep in mind the Board of Internal Economy's guidelines for mask use and health protocols.

Before speaking, please wait until I recognize you by name. If you are on the video conference, please click on the microphone icon to unmute yourself. For those in the room, your microphone will be controlled as normal by the proceedings and verification officer. When speaking, please speak slowly and clearly. When you are not speaking, your mike should be on mute. All comments by members should be addressed through the chair.

With regard to the speaking list, the committee clerk will advise the chair on whose hands are up, to the best of his ability. We will do the best we can to maintain a consolidated order of speaking for all members, whether they are participating virtually or in person.

Pursuant to the order adopted by the House of Commons on Tuesday, December 7, 2021, and the motion adopted on Tuesday, December 14, 2021, the committee is resuming its study of gun control, illegal arms trafficking and the increase in gun crimes committed by members of street gangs.

Today we have with us, via video conference, from Communities for Zero Violence, Evelyn Fox, founder; and from Keep6ix, Richard Miller, founder.

Witnesses will have up to five minutes for opening remarks, after which we will proceed with rounds of questions. Witnesses may also choose to split their allotted time for opening remarks with other witnesses if they so desire.

Welcome, everyone.

I now invite Ms. Fox to make an opening—

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Dane Lloyd Conservative Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Jim Carr

Go ahead, Mr. Lloyd.

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Dane Lloyd Conservative Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB

Given that this committee started half an hour late, I think it would only be fair to the witnesses if we were to allow 45 minutes for the first round and then 45 minutes for the second round so that we can have an equal weighting for witnesses. It looks like this first panel will get less than half an hour to discuss this.

Have there been any deliberations by you and the clerk, Chair, to address this shortened timeline?

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Jim Carr

It has been only that if we need it, we can add extra time at the end of the meeting. I am told that the extra time could be up to about 15 minutes.

I'll be as efficient as I can, Mr. Lloyd, and as fair as I can be, including allowing this first panel to go longer than the allotted time.

Okay? All right.

So—

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON

Chair, just on that point of order, in other committees we've been able to get the full two hours in when we've started later. Are we not able to go until 1:30 p.m.?

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Jim Carr

It's fine with me.

Clerk, can we go as late as 1:30 eastern time?

11:30 a.m.

The Clerk of the Committee Mr. Wassim Bouanani

Mr. Chair, we should be able to do so. Yes.

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Jim Carr

All right.

So that will be our goal.

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Dane Lloyd Conservative Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, do we require unanimous consent to extend the timeline of the meeting?

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Jim Carr

I'll look—

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Dane Lloyd Conservative Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB

Some of us do have things planned for after the meeting. I could do 15 minutes extra but certainly not an extra half-hour.

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Jim Carr

Go ahead, Clerk.

11:30 a.m.

The Clerk

Mr. Chair, you may request unanimous consent from the committee to go beyond 15 minutes. It's at the discretion of the committee to decide collectively or—

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Jim Carr

Do we require unanimous consent to go beyond 15 minutes?

11:30 a.m.

The Clerk

Is that question directed to the committee or to me, Mr. Chair?

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Jim Carr

It's directed to you, Clerk.

11:30 a.m.

The Clerk

You may, sir, yes, but for the first 15 minutes it's not necessary. Beyond that, you may request it if one of the members has requested unanimous consent.

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Jim Carr

Well, let's see where we're at 15 minutes after the hour. Then we'll consult the committee on how they want to proceed.

Okay? All right.

So—

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON

Chair?

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Jim Carr

Yes, go ahead, Ms. Damoff.

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON

We should decide now because it will determine how long these witnesses are here. If we're able to go to 1:30, which I don't think you need unanimous consent for, then we can do a full hour with these two witnesses and a full hour with our second panel.

I wonder if we could determine that now because otherwise it's going to impact..., and I really don't want to spend too much time talking about this because we're cutting into the witnesses' time, right?

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Jim Carr

Exactly.

Let me just ask the committee, is it your view that we ought to go to 30 minutes after the hour?

The consensus is that we should. Let's note that there is a member of the committee [Technical difficulty—Editor] so let's proceed.

I would now like to invite Ms. Fox to make an opening statement of up to five minutes. The floor is yours.

11:30 a.m.

Evelyn Fox Founder, Communities for Zero Violence

Thank you. My organization is Communities for Zero Violence.

Thank you for inviting me to speak in this forum. My name is Evelyn Fox. I'm the founder of Communities for Zero Violence, a non-profit agency that provides peer-led supports for homicide survivors and victims of community violence, as a way to interrupt the cycle. Communities for Zero Violence was formed eight months after the homicide of my eldest son Kiesingar Gunn in 2016.

Over the past five and a half years I have taught myself about the firearm laws and regulations, educated myself on the chief firearms officer's functioning and taken the firearms safety course, just for the knowledge, and was very impressed to hear the instructor's constant reminders of how to handle and store a firearm safely.

Every instance of violence has an intervention point that has been overlooked or not been acted upon by either people closest to that person, service providers or those in positions of power whose job it is to intervene. For instance, you can imagine my surprise when I learned that only 10% of personal references are contacted when someone initially [Technical difficulty--Editor] and none of the references contacted when renewing the licence, especially with trainers emphasizing the fact that the references would be contacted before being approved for the licence.

How is this ensuring public safety? Why are references not being contacted?

We live beside a country that has a patchwork system to regulate firearms that are illegally seeping through our borders in one form or another. CBSA is only required to inspect 1% of shipping containers that come over our borders: one of every 100. CBSA has seized vehicles at the border with multiple firearms hidden in them. How many times have those individuals smuggling the firearms been successful before getting caught? How will this be addressed? What improvements to the borders will be implemented?

More regulation for firearms in Canada as a way to eliminate community and gang violence, when all the community-level violence is being committed by those who are not licensed to possess or use them, will not be effective. Canada has adequate laws for firearm ownership, and the gatekeepers of ensuring our laws remain intact and strong have done an amazing job keeping them this way.

The talk of allowing the municipalities and provinces to ban firearms within their borders is an American-style regulation that we know does not work. To even suggest it is irresponsible and not in the best interest of any Canadian.

There has been discussion after discussion, report after report, with all the same recommendations for the past 14 years about addressing the social determinants of health and investing in communities across Canada, and still a gun ban and more regulation of firearms is a primary focus of investment. The significant polarization of opinions do not allow us to have an honest and meaningful discussion about the gun violence across the country. We cannot talk about a firearm ban without speaking about banning poverty and all the underlying issues that stem from it. We have traumatized communities that are never able to heal due to the continued occurrences of violence and the lack of resources to provide them support.

When my son Kiesingar was killed, my younger son was 12. He went from being a straight-A student with aspirations of being a human rights lawyer with the United Nations to failing all of his classes due to his inability to focus and his invasive thoughts. He started engaging in at-risk behaviour and self-medicating. He started engaging in illegal activities that started to escalate into various serious crimes. If I hadn't done everything I could to intervene, he was destined to end up being killed or killing someone else.

This is what all levels of government should be focusing on. There should be proactive, not reactive, approaches to eliminating the violence. The “Review of the Roots of Youth Violence” report, which outlines the most pervasive risk factors of why youth engage in violent acts, was issued in 2008. All levels of government are aware of the risk factors and recommendations set out in the report, and every party since in majority has cut the areas of recommendation and are now surprised that we have escalating community and gang violence.

Our communities are in crisis and it is long past due to do what is right by Canadians whose voices have been largely ignored, who deserve gainful opportunities to enrich their communities and their lives.

Those of us who have had our loved ones murdered are real people who suffer with real trauma. We deserve to have the support of our elected officials to make our communities safe. We should feel safe enough to allow our children to go to school, play in playgrounds, and attend social events and recreational facilities without the fear of them not returning due to the escalating violence that is terrorizing our cities.

Community safety is a right: A right my son had to go out and enjoy his time with his fiancée, a right to return home after enjoying his night and a right to exist free from violence wherever he chose to travel throughout the city, our province and our country. That—

11:35 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Jim Carr

Ms. Fox, I'm sorry for having to interrupt.