Public Safety committee  I think there's nothing in the act that would change the provisions that elected officials remain in control of the regulations. I think the question, as your colleague has suggested, is that perhaps since section 84 already includes the definition of regulations, this provision

Public Safety committee  Proposed subsection 5(2) includes certain offences already that must be taken into consideration. The amendment would add additional offences to the class of those that must be taken into consideration.

Public Safety committee  I would just point out that clause 2 as drafted deals only with eligibility for grandfathering for individuals. As your colleague pointed out, the regime for businesses is separate and is dealt with under the firearms licences regulations, in section 22. It's a separate regime fo

Public Safety committee  My justice colleagues have just reminded me as well that it might be helpful to bring to your attention section 11 of the Firearms Act. Under the provision of special cases it also deals with prohibited firearms, weapons, devices, and ammunition for businesses. There are, as Rob

Public Safety committee  I think that if we've understood it correctly, as we read it for the first time, it would propose to extend the grandfathering regime to the heritors or estate of a grandfathered owner. Currently what's proposed in Bill C-71 for the firearms in question is that this class of gra

Public Safety committee  Parliament to date has only enacted one situation where the ownership of prohibited firearms passes from one generation to another, and that is in the pre-1946 handguns, the so-called war trophy exemption. The intent in Bill C-71 is that, in the firearms affected by this bill, li

Public Safety committee  If it operated in that function, it would create another new eligible owner for grandfathering down through the generations.

Public Safety committee  One at a time is correct, but still, it would not cause the pool to diminish over time, which is the intent of Bill C-71.

Public Safety committee  The date remains the same. I suggested that there's no need to update the date, in the sense that the date is roughly three months from the time of introduction of the bill. That period was intended to provide people in the marketplace—owners, buyers, sellers, importers, wholesal

Public Safety committee  No matter what day it is that the bill becomes law, that was not intended as the effective date to be an eligible owner for grandfathering. What the date of June 30, 2018 does is establish the point in time at which an owner will be asked to establish, as a matter of fact, that t

Public Safety committee  The intent is to ensure that current owners—current roughly at the time the bill was introduced—can be eligible for grandfathering, irrespective of when the bill comes into force.

Public Safety committee  That's correct.

Public Safety committee  They would still be lawful. The status of the firearm does not change on June 30. June 30 is simply the date by which, in future, once the bill has passed both houses of Parliament and been brought into force, an owner would have had to be in possession of one in order to be gran

Public Safety committee  It provides certainty for people to make their decisions about whether they wish to get into or out of that class of firearm by a given date.

Public Safety committee  We defer to you on whether it's desirable or not, but the effect—