Foreign Affairs committee  I want to be very clear. We do believe the ATT will affect small end-users, small legal, law-abiding firearms owners in this country, because of some of the language in the ATT. As for what happens in other countries, it is not either the mandate of my organization or really our

Foreign Affairs committee  Yes.

Foreign Affairs committee  I'll give a conditional yes on that, simply because the regulatory regime that's attached to the bill is unknown at this time.

Foreign Affairs committee  A caveat, but the bill itself, with that exclusion in it, I see no reason why not to.

Foreign Affairs committee  I'm going to choose my words very carefully because the parliamentary secretary is present in the room. Given the assurances that the parliamentary secretary gave repeatedly during debate, and given assurances that I personally have received in meeting with government members—inc

Foreign Affairs committee  Yes. I don't think requesting that—quote, unquote—“exemption” or language that clarifies that situation within the legislation is unreasonable given the assurances we've had from the government side of the House. If it's not acceptable, you have to question why the language used

Foreign Affairs committee  I'll try to very quickly address two or three things. Number one, the fact that we're already adhering to article 12 does not make it any less disconcerting, given that there's no reassurance within Bill C-47 or in the words that have been spoken in Parliament by the government

Foreign Affairs committee  Okay. The other—

Foreign Affairs committee  The last point I would want to raise is that proposed subsection 10.2(1) talks about inspections and uses the language, “An inspector may, at all reasonable times”. Any time you see language that says “at all reasonable times”, it sets off a bit of a red flag, because what's reas

Foreign Affairs committee  I didn't mean to go off on a tangent there. I apologize.