Ralph Goodale

[Firearms Act, March 27th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, just to be absolutely clear, I would like the hon. gentleman to ask that question once more, so I get the detail of what he is asking.

[Firearms Act, March 27th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, it is important for the House of Commons to not only debate matters but to also come to decision points, take votes, and make decisions.

The improvements in the legislation with respect to background checks, licence verifications, and business records, and the changes on classification and transportation authorizations all reflect what we promised Canadians during the course of the election campaign. The bill faithfully applies those election promises. All of it is in pursuit of three goals: public safety, assisting police in investigating crimes, and making sure that all of this is fair and reasonable in its application to all Canadians, including law-abiding firearms owners.

[Firearms Act, March 27th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, beyond the two opportunities where we already tried to bring the bill to the floor of the House for debate, there will be one full day of debate assigned to this legislation. Therefore, there will be opportunity.

When examining the provisions of the legislation in detail, as we all know, the real spade work is done by the diligent members who serve on the public safety and national security committee of the House of Commons. That is where witnesses can be called, where the evidence can be examined in detail, and where amendments can be proposed.

I certainly encourage all members to participate in the upcoming debate in the House, and that the members of the standing committee do their due diligence to examine every single clause of the bill to make sure it is in the public interest.

[Firearms Act, March 27th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, the reference to the official who is named in the legislation that the hon. gentleman has just made is one that goes back many years. In fact, the term “registrar” existed in the legislation all through the term of the Harper government, and it did not change that language.

The fact of the matter is that if the standing committee thinks it has a better title, such as CEO, director general, chief official, or whatever, we would certainly be prepared to entertain an amendment to change the title.

[Firearms Act, March 27th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, I have a good deal of sympathy for the position that has just been taken by the representative of the New Democratic Party. In the proceedings thus far, the NDP has not had an opportunity to participate in the debate. The House will know that we have on two occasions attempted to bring Bill C-71 to the House of Commons, last Friday and again yesterday. On both occasions, the official opposition chose a different procedure and stymied the opening of a discussion on Bill C-71. There were two speeches, mine and the official representative of the Conservative Party, and then the Conservative Party moved to adjourn the debate before even giving the NDP an opportunity to be heard.

I understand that is not a fair situation with respect to the NDP. However, the honourable gentleman's grievance is not with the government. His grievance is with the official opposition, which is obviously not interested in having a serious discussion about this legislation. The better place for that discussion to be had would be in the standing committee, where the various parties can call forward witnesses, talk about the provisions of the act in detail, and bring forward whatever amendments they think are appropriate to improve the legislation.

[Firearms Act, March 27th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, we said in our election platform, and have said repeatedly since, that we would not return to any form of a federal long gun registry. That was the explicit promise, and that promise is being delivered exactly as we made it.

In relation to provincial governments, as the honourable gentleman knows, provinces have jurisdictions, which are their exclusive domain. The issue has been tested in the courts in the province of Quebec, and the legislative provisions Quebec has come forward with have been determined to be within the jurisdictional competence of the provincial Government of Quebec.

[Public Safety, March 26th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, will the Leader of the Opposition accept the full classified briefing so he can be informed, or does he just want to continue a silly political charade?

[Public Safety, March 26th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, it is abundantly clear that the opposition is not interested in real information. It is not interested in facts and figures. It wants to obfuscate and play games with a very serious situation.

The fact of the matter is that the offer has been made. The opposition should accept that offer and become informed. If it declines to be informed, clearly the opposition is trying to be wilfully blind and just play a political game.

[Public Safety, March 26th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, let me return the favour. Will the Leader of the Opposition accept an offer for a full classified briefing on all the facts of the situation so he can be informed, or does the Leader of the Opposition prefer to be wilfully blind and play politics?

[Public Safety, March 26th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the opposition is clearly playing political games with a very serious situation.

The fact of the matter is that last Friday the opposition threw away an entire question period. It filibustered in unnecessary votes for hours on end. It has twice cancelled debate on the firearms legislation, which is designed to make Canadians safer in their communities.

The opposition is not at all interested in the public interest of Canada. It is interested in silly political games that simply do not stand the test.