Debates of April 5th, 1995

Firearms Act

[Bob Speller, Liberal, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

I will make a motion. I wonder if I can have unanimous consent to move this motion. I move:

That section 80 on page 36 through to section 112 on page 51 could be removed from this bill and brought back as another bill under the name of the Canadian firearms registration system.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Does the member have unanimous consent to move the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Deputy Speaker]

There is not unanimous consent. The member has the floor on debate.

[Darrel Stinson, Reform, Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

A Liberal said no.

[Bob Speller, Liberal, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Mr. Speaker, a number of members on all sides of the House would support a motion like that. I hope that maybe we can work as this bill goes through its other stages to convince the minister to do something like that.

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Beaver River, AB]

Absolutely.

[Bob Speller, Liberal, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I notice that you gave our hon. colleague a going over for heckling before.

[The Deputy Speaker]

The member has a good point. As the member for Beaver River will agree, I asked the member not to heckle her. I wonder if members on the Reform side would not heckle the member.

[Bob Speller, Liberal, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I return to the Criminal Code provisions and registration. A number of members have raised concerns about people who do not properly register their guns and therefore get a criminal record. I hope the committee will look at the issue. I know the minister has indicated to the Canadian Police Association that he would be willing to look at it. I know that members of the Liberal caucus will be working with the minister over the next little while to make sure that is a fact.

I would like to see a sunset clause on registration. We have found that there are difficulties with the handgun registration system. Frankly, I am not sure how this one is going to work. For instance if it is not working in 10 years, let's hoist it and get rid of it. If the minister can prove it is working, then leave it alone. However, something like a sunset clause may not be a bad idea.

Handguns are prohibited, however certain handguns are used now in gun clubs. I know the minister has indicated his willingness to work with national associations concerning handguns they say they should be able to use. I also hope that the minister and perhaps the committee will listen to other clubs whose members use handguns, but which may not always follow national association criteria.

I also have a real concern with how this bill deals with regulations and how it will look at an area that is not normally considered, that of long arms. An example is the Ruger Mini-14. I know it is not considered in this bill. However, there will be a provision created under which the minister can deal with the Ruger Mini-14 and prohibit it from being used.

In my area a number of farmers use it to shoot coyotes. It is the gun of preference to get rid of the coyotes. A number of people will be concerned with that area. Should these guns still be used to hunt or at gun clubs? I hope the minister will allow us time to deal with that issue.

I have listened to members of the Reform Party over the last while talking about the bill and how their constituents are against it. As members of Parliament we must deal with that. It is the Reform Party that says it has to represent the wishes of its constituents. I agree with that. That is why I talk with my constituents and try to get to as many areas as I can.

All members have to look at the results of national polls. I refer to a poll that was done by the minister of justice of Alberta. I want to quote from that poll. Obviously, everyone knows that the polls taken showed that Albertans were against this. It did not show that in the rural areas, which is of a concern to me because a lot of areas of Alberta are somewhat like southwestern Ontario. We have a lot in common.

If we look at the question: "Do you strongly agree or strongly disagree with registration of rifles?" The numbers were 50 per cent said they agreed and 48 per cent somewhat agreed or disagreed.

However, in some rural centres the numbers were: strongly agree, 58 per cent; strongly disagree, 43 per cent. It clearly shows that even in rural Alberta they support the minister in the registration of long arms.

As members of Parliament we not only have to consider our constituents but we also must take into account the importance of the bill.

[The Deputy Speaker]

It being 5.15 p.m., pursuant to the order made earlier today, in accordance with the provisions of Standing Order 78(3), it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of second reading stage of the bill now before the House.

The first vote is on the amendment. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the amendment?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Deputy Speaker]

All those in favour will please say yea.

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Deputy Speaker]

All those opposed will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Deputy Speaker]

In my opinion the nays have it.

And more than five members having risen.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the amendment, which was negatived on the following division:)

[The Speaker]

I declare the amendment lost. The next question is on the main motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Speaker]

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

[Some hon. members]

Yea.