Thank you, Madam Chair.
I hope that we will not go on for too much longer because afterwards we are supposed to celebrate, and I would prefer that we do it while we still like each other.
I am obligated to speak not only about the motion, but also about the registry that was established in 1995. The police forces are also in agreement with that, as we saw in the report that was tabled after the vote. The report was ready before the vote took place, but no one wanted us to know what the report contained. Information was being hidden from us.
I would also like to clarify something. The members of the families of the victims did not ask us to bring forward this motion. They asked us to do everything in our power to maintain the firearms registry. I believe that this motion would allow us to remind people of the reasons for which the firearms registry was created. It would allow us to have the energy to keep up the fight and to give these women survivors and these families the assurance that the registry will continue to exist.
I am convinced that it is not all hunters who will use their gun to kill their spouse, their daughter or their children. Unfortunately, often times hunters do use their gun to kill their spouse, their children, their family, when family conflicts arise. These are not habitual criminals, these are spontaneous criminals who commit this crime. They will commit only that crime, but they will nevertheless commit it with a long-barrelled gun.
If the police officers are unaware that there are firearms in the house, when a man who is accused of violence against his wife... If the policemen are even just aware of the fact that there is a weapon in the house, they will know how to act and they will retrieve the weapon.
We know that 88% of women who are killed are killed with long guns. This is a very important statistic, and I do not think that we can ignore the importance of the registry nor its establishment. On the contrary, its establishment was one of the most courageous actions we were able to take, despite the fact that it was very costly. However, today it is no longer that costly. It only costs 7 or 8 million dollars a year, which is very little.
At present, it is costing $7 million a year for Mr. Harper to get his face on television. In my opinion, we can spend $7 million a year to save the lives of women.