Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of Bill C-71, an act to amend the Explosives Act. Today I will address some of the concerns members opposite have raised during the second reading debate and I will emphasize the major points government members raised during that debate.
Let me begin by thanking members opposite for expressing support from their respective parties for Bill C-71 during the debate on second reading of the proposed legislation.
I note from Hansard that during the debate the hon. member for Matapédia-Matane asked what is the use of marking explosives if we do not monitor them. My response is that we do. Canada's explosives inspectors are doing an excellent job of monitoring legally licensed makers, distributors and users of explosives in the country.
There are concerns about how terrorists and biker gangs get their explosives. Terrorists typically purchase stolen explosives on the black market, or they make their own if they have the expertise, as was the case in the horrific bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building this summer.
Sources for stolen explosives include explosives obtained from break-ins and thefts from storage magazines on construction sites, in mines and quarries. Naturally these incidents fall within the jurisdiction of Canada's police agencies. In any case I submit to the House that it is not a common occurrence in the country. The mere fact that it can happen does not require a maze of restrictive and unnecessary regulations from any government, least of all the Government of Canada.
Furthermore, explosives that are used or intended for use in criminal activities are never purchased from legitimate vendors licensed under the terms of existing federal explosives legislation. That is because legitimate vendors must keep accurate and complete transaction records for all explosives they sell. These records, coupled with the records of police security checks that are required under the terms of the existing Explosives Act, could easily provide a clear paper trail of evidence to anyone who used legally obtained explosives to commit a crime.
Let me return to the issues that are more closely related to the proposed legislation before the House. With respect to the length of time it has taken to submit the amendment to Parliament, I want to make a few points.
Officials at Natural Resources Canada have indicated to me that shortly before the Montreal convention on the marking of plastic explosives was signed in 1991 they joined their colleagues from national defence, customs, and transport to prepare a memorandum to cabinet regarding the proposed amendments to the Explosives Act. As members of the House may recall, there were significant changes in the structure of federal government departments in mid-1993. Shortly thereafter a federal election was held, resulting in even more significant change. Since then the Government of Canada has been working hard to put Canada on a positive new course for the future, to revitalize employment opportunities for all Canadians, to attack major issues such as the deficit and debt and, in short, to get Canada moving again. The government is delivering the good government that Canadians wanted and deserved. In addition we are making excellent progress to reach a number of positive public policy objectives.
Hon. members will know we have faced tremendous challenges to deliver on our promises to Canadians and that the Government of Canada has worked hard to manage our priorities since 1993 in order to succeed. I hardly think this debate is the appropriate forum to trot out the list of our accomplishments but if members opposite wish me to do so I will be more than happy to.
Departmental officials had to review their work to prepare their memorandum to cabinet concerning the amendments to the Explosives Act we have before us today. Consequently the officials made the necessary revisions to meet the demands of a new government. The officials have done an excellent job.
The 1991 convention signed in Montreal represents an international agreement to combine efforts among nations to reduce the risk of any further aircraft bombings. Participation in this effort is viewed by Canada as an essential element in the continuing battle against terrorism.
Like all international agreements, the convention on marking of plastic explosives is based on trust among signatory nations. Canada respects this spirit. Canada is known around the world as a leader in encouraging progress to increase the trust among nations that leads to progressive international conventions.
We have every intention of living up to all of our international obligations in the hopes that other countries will follow our example. This is not a blind trust; this is the essence of good leadership.
At present there is no way to detect plastic explosives in airports, while conventional explosives materials can be detected by equipment at our airports. The act proposes the marking of plastic explosives by adding a chemical which would be detected by equipment in Canada's international airports and thus ward off the threat of terrorism.
The amendment would allow Canada to be among the first nations to ratify an international convention requested by the United Nations and co-ordinated by the international civil aviation organization with respect to the marking of plastic explosives.
The convention was signed in March 1991 by 40 countries, and 14 countries have already ratified the convention since April 1992. Five of these nations, Norway, Spain, Switzerland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic, are producer states where plastic explosives are manufactured.
Given that Canada is a world leader in vapour detection technology, Canadian equipment manufacturers will be able to take advantage of international market opportunities for their vapour detection technology as more and more countries ratify the convention.
Plastic explosives have emerged as a weapon of choice among terrorist groups for bombing aircraft and other targets such as public buildings because this type of explosive is small, powerful, stable, malleable and, most important, difficult to detect.
If plastic explosives are marked or tagged with a substance that can be detected by equipment at Canadian airports, it is quite likely that terrorists would be discouraged from attempting any attacks in Canada using plastic explosives.
The convention on the marking of plastic explosives requires states to ensure the marking of plastic explosives to enhance their detectability. The convention also requires controls over the import, export, possession and transfer of marked plastic explosives and the destruction of most unmarked plastic explosives.
Let me remind the House about the main features of the convention. Only plastic explosives as defined in the convention are required to be marked. Existing unmarked commercial stocks of plastic explosives are to be destroyed within three years. An international explosives technical commission will be created to assess technical developments.
The cost of Canadian participation in such a commission will be low and the convention will come in force after 35 states including the 5 producer states have ratified it. Canada is one of the world's producer states and by passing the proposed legislation before the House today Canada will be among the first countries to ratify the important convention.
Looking at other departments, the military has agreed it can except perhaps in times of emergency observe all of the terms of the convention. Priority will be given to the use of unmarked stocks of plastic explosives in the military stock of explosives materials. As always, tight security of storage facilities will be maintained. In addition, tight accounting procedures regarding the use of all stocks will also be maintained.
Transport Canada, responsible for the operation of detection equipment at Canadian airports, has indicated current technology can detect the marked plastic explosives.
The extra cost of producing detectable plastic explosives is expected to be negligible. This is primarily due to the relatively low volumes of plastic explosives manufactured in Canada. The industry has been working in co-operation with organizations involved in the effort to develop substances to mark plastic explosives for the purpose of detection. Therefore the industry acknowledges the impact of extra costs will not be that serious.
In addition, given the low volumes of plastic explosives compared with the volumes of conventional industrial explosives, the challenge of enforcing the provisions of this proposed amend-
ment and by extension the international convention will not pose a significant problem or cost to the respective regulatory bodies.
Canada's position as a leader in the development of vapour detection technology will be enhanced as a result of the ratification of the international convention. Increased foreign market penetration by Canadian equipment manufacturers is virtually a certainty. Therefore the proclamation of the amendment has the potential to help stimulate job creation and contribute to Canada's future economic growth and trade.
The amendment to the Explosives Act demonstrates the Government of Canada's commitment to good government. We are determined to contribute to the health and safety of passengers on aircraft. We are committed to working with our international partners to do whatever we can to stop the threat of terrorism in our skies and around the globe.
The amendment to the Explosives Act will send a signal to terrorists everywhere that Canada will not be an easy target for their deadly campaigns of violence. In the process, Canadian manufacturers of vapour detection equipment will be able to take advantage of significant marketing opportunities. As a result, the proposed amendment to the Explosives Act will contribute to two major federal goals: job creation and Canadian economic growth. Moreover the passage of the amendment will protect the health and safety of all Canadians.
I thank members opposite for their support in passing important legislation. I urge all members of the House to give speedy passage to the amendment.