SECU Committee Meeting
Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.
For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
Minutes of Proceedings
The witnesses answered questions.
The Committee resumed its clause-by-clause study of the Bill.
On Clause 3,
Glen Motz moved, — That Bill C-71, in Clause 3, be amended(a) by replacing line 26 on page 2 with the following:
“firearms on the prescribed date;”
(b) by replacing line 1 on page 3 with the following:
“(i) the prescribed date, in the case where at least one of”
(c) by replacing lines 17 and 18 on page 3 with the following:
“(b) was registered as a restricted firearm on the prescribed date or, in the case of a firearm that was not a restrict-”
(d) by replacing line 30 on page 3 with the following:
“firearms on the prescribed date;”
(e) by replacing line 8 on page 4 with the following:
“(i) the prescribed date, in the case where at least one of”
(f) by replacing lines 1 and 2 on page 5 with the following:
“(b) was registered as a restricted firearm on the prescribed date or, in the case of a firearm that was not a restrict-”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Glen Motz and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.
(a) by deleting lines 8 to 16 on page 3.
(b) by deleting lines 23 to 25 on page 3.
(c) by deleting lines 14 to 35 on page 4.
(d) by replacing, in the French version, line 4 on page 5 with the following:
“b) était enregistrée comme arme à feu à ”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pierre Paul-Hus and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
“(12.1) For greater certainty, to ensure respect for Canadian heritage, the transfer of firearms owned by individuals referred to in subsections 12(2) to (6), (8) to (10) and (13) who live on Indigenous reserve lands or in remote areas, by individuals who make their livelihood from hunting and by individuals whose firearm is related to service in the Canadian Armed Forces or an allied military force is exempt from the requirements for transferring such a firearm.”
The Chair ruled that the following amendment was consequential to the previous amendment and therefore it was also inadmissible:
That Bill C-71, in Clause 10, be amended by adding after line 27 on page 9 the following:“(2.1) For greater certainty, to ensure respect for Canadian heritage, any individual who owns a firearm and lives on Indigenous reserve lands or in remote areas, who makes their livelihood from hunting or whose firearm is related to service in the Canadian Armed Forces or an allied military force can transfer their firearm provided he or she informs the Registrar of the transfer within 30 days.”
Whereupon, Blaine Calkins appealed the decision of the Chair.
The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was sustained, by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 3.
Clause 3 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 3.
On Clause 4,
Pierre Paul-Hus moved, — That Bill C-71, in Clause 4, be amended by replacing lines 4 to 24 on page 6 with the following:“(3) Subsection 19(2.3) of the Act is replaced by the following:”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pierre Paul-Hus and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
(a) by replacing line 12 on page 6 with the following:
“tion 29, as well as to and from any business that holds a licence authorizing it to repair or appraise such restricted firearms or handguns. However, the authorization does not apply to a”
(b) by replacing line 33 on page 6 with the following:
“section 29, as well as to and from any business that holds a licence authorizing it to repair or appraise such a restricted firearm or handgun, unless the transfer of the restricted firearm or”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Glen Motz and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Blaine Calkins, Matthew Dubé, Glen Motz, Pierre Paul-Hus — 4;
NAYS: Julie Dabrusin, Pam Damoff, Peter Fragiskatos, Ken Hardie, Sonia Sidhu — 5.
“tion 29, to and from a business that holds a licence authorizing it to repair or appraise prohibited firearms or restricted firearms, and to and from a gun show. However, the authorization does not apply to a”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pierre Paul-Hus and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
“tion 29, to and from a business that holds a licence authorizing it to repair or appraise prohibited firearms or restricted firearms, to and from a gun show, to a port of exit in order to take them outside Canada, and from a port of entry. However, the authorization does not apply to a”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Blaine Calkins and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
Clause 4 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 3.
On Clause 5,
Matthew Dubé moved, — That Bill C-71, in Clause 5, be amended by replacing line 39 on page 6 with the following:“23 (1) A person may transfer one or more non-restricted firearms if,”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Matthew Dubé and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.
“firearm; and
(b) the transferor has verified the transferee's licence in writing, online or by phone with the Registrar.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pierre Paul-Hus and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
At 5:34 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 5:52 p.m., the sitting resumed.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pierre Paul-Hus and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
(a) by deleting line 7 on page 7.
(b) by deleting line 17 on page 7.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pierre Paul-Hus and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
“cence.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Glen Motz and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Glen Motz and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 5.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Glen Motz and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
Debate arose thereon.
The question was put on the amendment of Glen Motz and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
“tion (3), he or she must so inform the transferor.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pierre Paul-Hus and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.
“(6) The Registrar shall not keep a record of the reference numbers issued.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pierre Paul-Hus and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Luc Berthold, Blaine Calkins, Pierre Paul-Hus — 3;
NAYS: Julie Dabrusin, Pam Damoff, Matthew Dubé, Peter Fragiskatos, Richard Hébert, Sonia Sidhu — 6.
Clause 5, as amended, carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Julie Dabrusin, Pam Damoff, Matthew Dubé, Peter Fragiskatos, Richard Hébert, Sonia Sidhu — 6;
NAYS: Luc Berthold, Blaine Calkins, Pierre Paul-Hus — 3.
Clause 6 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 3.
On Clause 7,
Pierre Paul-Hus moved, — That Bill C-71, in Clause 7, be amended by replacing line 5 on page 8 with the following:“(b) the business must record and — for a period of 10”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pierre Paul-Hus and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
“(b) the business must record and keep the following information in re-”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Blaine Calkins and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
“non-restricted firearm – keep the following information in re-”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pierre Paul-Hus and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Luc Berthold, Blaine Calkins, Pierre Paul-Hus — 3;
NAYS: Julie Dabrusin, Pam Damoff, Matthew Dubé, Richard Hébert, Joe Peschisolido, Sonia Sidhu — 6.
“in the circumstances that may be prescribed or seven years after the records were transmitted to them, whichever is earlier.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Blaine Calkins and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
“(3) Despite section 102, an inspector may not inspect any record of a business for the purpose of ensuring compliance with this section except under a warrant.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pierre Paul-Hus and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
Clause 7 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Julie Dabrusin, Pam Damoff, Matthew Dubé, Peter Fragiskatos, Richard Hébert, Sonia Sidhu — 6;
NAYS: Blaine Calkins, Glen Motz, Pierre Paul-Hus — 3.
Clause 8 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 1.
Clause 9 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 1.
“9.1 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 72:
Reconsideration by the Commissioner
73 (1) If a chief firearms officer or the Registrar, as the case may be, refuses to issue or revokes a licence, registration certificate, authorization to transport, authorization to export or authorization to import, the applicant for or holder of the licence, registration certificate or authorization may, within 30 days after the day on which he or she received notice of the decision of the chief firearms officer or the Registrar under section 67 or 72, request in writing to the Commissioner that he or she reconsider the decision.
(2) The request for reconsideration must set out
(a) the decision that is the subject of the request;
(b) the reasons for the request, including any new information that the applicant or holder concerned wishes the Commissioner to consider; and
(c) any information prescribed by regulation.
(3) On receipt of a request made in accordance with this section, the Commissioner shall give the applicant or holder concerned a reasonable opportunity to make representations.
(4) Within a reasonable time after representations have been made or an opportunity to do so has been given, the Commissioner shall reconsider the decision, in accordance with the regulations, if any, and
(a) confirm the decision of the chief firearms officer or the Registrar;
(b) direct the chief firearms officer or the Registrar to issue a licence, registration certificate or authorization; or
(c) cancel the revocation of the licence, registration certificate or authorization or the decision of the chief firearms officer under section 67.
(5) The Commissioner shall notify the applicant or holder concerned in writing of the decision made following the reconsideration.”
The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was beyond the scope of the Bill, as provided on page 770 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Third Edition.
The Chair ruled that the following amendment was consequential to the previous amendment and therefore it was also inadmissible:
That Bill C-71 be amended by adding after line 33 on page 8 the following new clause:“9.1 Subsection 74(1) of the Act is amended by striking out “or” at the end of paragraph (b), by adding “or” at the end of paragraph (c) and by adding the following after paragraph (c):
(d) the Commissioner confirms the decision made by the chief firearms officer or the Registrar following a request for reconsideration under section 73,”
Whereupon, Blaine Calkins appealed the decision of the Chair.
The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was sustained on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Julie Dabrusin, Pam Damoff, Matthew Dubé, Peter Fragiskatos, Richard Hébert, Sonia Sidhu — 6;
NAYS: Blaine Calkins, Glen Motz, Pierre Paul-Hus — 3.
On Clause 10,
Pierre Paul-Hus moved, — That Bill C-71, in Clause 10, be amended by deleting lines 13 to 27 on page 9.After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pierre Paul-Hus and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 5.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pierre Paul-Hus and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 5.
Clause 10 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Julie Dabrusin, Pam Damoff, Matthew Dubé, Peter Fragiskatos, Richard Hébert, Sonia Sidhu — 6;
NAYS: Blaine Calkins, Glen Motz, Pierre Paul-Hus — 3.
Clause 11 carried on division.
Clause 12 carried on division.
“12.1 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 111:
112 Despite sections 109 and 111, no person guilty of an offence set out in those sections is liable to imprisonment if, in the commission of the offence, the person caused no bodily harm to another person.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Blaine Calkins and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Blaine Calkins, Glen Motz, Pierre Paul-Hus — 3;
NAYS: Julie Dabrusin, Pam Damoff, Matthew Dubé, Peter Fragiskatos, Richard Hébert, Sonia Sidhu — 6.
On Clause 13,
Pierre Paul-Hus moved, — That Bill C-71, in Clause 13, be amended by deleting line 37 on page 9 to line 3 on page 10.After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pierre Paul-Hus and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Glen Motz and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 5.
Clause 13 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Julie Dabrusin, Pam Damoff, Matthew Dubé, Peter Fragiskatos, Richard Hébert, Sonia Sidhu — 6;
NAYS: Blaine Calkins, Glen Motz, Pierre Paul-Hus — 3.
Clause 14 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 3.
On Clause 15,
Glen Motz moved, — That Bill C-71, in Clause 15, be amended by replacing line 23 on page 10 with the following:“prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm are revoked on the 3rd anniversary of the day on which this section comes into force, namely:”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Glen Motz and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
Clause 15 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Julie Dabrusin, Pam Damoff, Matthew Dubé, Peter Fragiskatos, Richard Hébert, Sonia Sidhu — 6;
NAYS: Blaine Calkins, Glen Motz, Pierre Paul-Hus — 3.
On Clause 16,
Pierre Paul-Hus moved, — That Bill C-71, in Clause 16, be amended by replacing line 2 on page 11 with the following:“prohibited firearm nor a restricted firearm and includes a firearm that is classified as non-restricted by a technical committee of firearms experts to be established by order of the Governor in Council; (arme à feu)”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pierre Paul-Hus and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
Clause 16 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Julie Dabrusin, Pam Damoff, Matthew Dubé, Peter Fragiskatos, Richard Hébert, Sonia Sidhu — 6;
NAYS: Blaine Calkins, Glen Motz, Pierre Paul-Hus — 3.
Clause 17 carried on division.
On Clause 18,
Pierre Paul-Hus moved, — That Bill C-71, in Clause 18, be amended by replacing lines 12 and 13 on page 11 with the following:“18 Subsection 117.15(4) of the Act is repealed.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pierre Paul-Hus and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 5.
Clause 18 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Julie Dabrusin, Pam Damoff, Matthew Dubé, Peter Fragiskatos, Richard Hébert, Sonia Sidhu — 6;
NAYS: Blaine Calkins, Glen Motz, Pierre Paul-Hus — 3.
“18.1 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 117.15:
117.16 (1) The following definitions apply in this section.
Board means the Firearms Classification Board established under subsection (2). (Commission)
classification, in respect of a firearm, means a system of determining, for the purposes of this Act and the Firearms Act, whether a firearm is a prohibited firearm, a restricted firearm or a non-restricted firearm. (classification)
Minister means the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness. (ministre)
(2) The Firearms Classification Board is established, consisting of a Chair and up to four other members, each of whom is to be appointed by the Governor in Council on the recommendation of the Minister after consultation with firearms experts and law enforcement personnel.
(3) A member of the Board holds office during pleasure until the dissolution of Parliament following their appointment, but may resign by notifying the Minister in writing of their intention to do so. The member ceases to be a member on the day on which the Minister receives the notification or on the date specified in the notification, whichever is later.
(4) The mandate of the Board is to determine the classification of firearms, whether on its own initiative, or on request from a person who holds a licence authorizing the individual to possess prohibited firearms or restricted firearms.
(5) The Board is to meet at the call of the Chair and may determine the procedure to be followed in the exercise of any of its powers or the performance of any of its duties or functions.
(6) Despite any other Act of Parliament, the Board is entitled to have access to any information that is under the control of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in relation to the classification of a firearm.
(7) The Board shall inform the Minister in writing if, in its opinion, a firearm is to have a different classification and shall include the reasons for its opinion.
(8) The Minister shall cause the opinion and the reasons to appear in the Canada Gazette no later than 14 days after they are received by the Minister.
(9) The Minister must, within 10 days after the opinion and the reasons are published in the Canada Gazette, prescribe the firearm as advised in the opinion.”
The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it infringed on the financial initiative of the Crown, as provided on page 772 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Third Edition.
The Chair ruled that the following amendment was consequential to the previous amendment and therefore it was also inadmissible:
That Bill C-71 be amended by adding after line 13 on page 11 the following new clause:“18.1 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 117.15:
117.16 (1) The following definitions apply in this section.
Board means the Firearms Classification Board established under subsection (2). (Commission)
classification, in respect of a firearm, means a system of determining, for the purposes of this Act and the Firearms Act, whether a firearm is a prohibited firearm, a restricted firearm or a non-restricted firearm. (classification)
Minister means the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness. (ministre)
(2) The Firearms Classification Board is established, consisting of
(a) two law enforcement officers;
(b) two individuals from the public who have demonstrable technical firearms expertise; and
(c) one member of the Canadian Forces.
(3) Each member of the Board is to be appointed by the Governor in Council on the recommendation of the Minister after consultation with firearms experts and law enforcement personnel.
(4) A member of the Board holds office during pleasure until the dissolution of Parliament following their appointment, but may resign by notifying the Minister in writing of their intention to do so. The member ceases to be a member on the day on which the Minister receives the notification or on the date specified in the notification, whichever is later.
(5) The mandate of the Board is to determine the classification of firearms, whether on its own initiative or on request from a person who holds a licence authorizing the individual to possess prohibited firearms or restricted firearms.
(6) The Board is to meet at the call of the Chair and may determine the procedure to be followed in the exercise of any of its powers or the performance of any of its duties or functions.
(7) Despite any other Act of Parliament, the Board is entitled to have access to any information that is under the control of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in relation to the classification of a firearm.
(8) The Board shall inform the Minister in writing if, in its opinion, a firearm is to have a different classification and shall include the reasons for its opinion.
(9) The Minister shall cause the opinion and the reasons to appear in the Canada Gazette no later than 14 days after they are received by the Minister.
(10) The Minister must, within 10 days after the opinion and the reasons are published in the Canada Gazette, prescribe the firearm as advised in the opinion.”
On Clause 19,
Pierre Paul-Hus moved, — That Bill C-71, in Clause 19, be amended by replacing lines 20 to 23 on page 11 with the following:“Regulations Prescribing the Legal Status of Certain Firearms and Other Weapons, Components, Accessories, Ammunition and Projectiles”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pierre Paul-Hus and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
Clause 19 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Julie Dabrusin, Pam Damoff, Matthew Dubé, Peter Fragiskatos, Richard Hébert, Sonia Sidhu — 6;
NAYS: Blaine Calkins, Glen Motz, Pierre Paul-Hus — 3.
Clause 20 carried on division.
Clause 21 carried on division.
On Clause 22,
Glen Motz moved, — That Bill C-71, in Clause 22, be amended by deleting lines 1 to 15 on page 12.After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Glen Motz and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 2; NAYS: 6.
“22 Sections 3 to 21 come into force on a day to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council.”
The question was put on the amendment of Pierre Paul-Hus and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
“22 This Act comes into force on a day to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Glen Motz and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.
“(4) Sections 5 and 9 to 11”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pierre Paul-Hus and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 5.
“(5) Sections 7 and 14”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Glen Motz and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 5.
“(6) No order is to be made under this section until after the federal Minister causes to be tabled in each House of Parliament a copy of a report on consultations in relation to the proposed order that
(a) indicates support for the coming into force of the provisions of this Act that are the subject of the order from law enforcement officers, firearms owners and the Canadian public; and
(b) includes the names of individuals consulted as well as the dates on which the consultations occurred.”
The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it sought to attach a condition to the coming into force clause, as provided on page 773 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Third Edition.
Clause 22 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Julie Dabrusin, Pam Damoff, Matthew Dubé, Peter Fragiskatos, Richard Hébert, Sonia Sidhu — 6;
NAYS: Blaine Calkins, Glen Motz, Pierre Paul-Hus — 3.
By unanimous consent, Clauses 23 to 30 inclusive carried on division.
The Title carried on division.
The Bill, as amended, carried on division.
ORDERED, — That the Chair report the Bill, as amended, to the House.
ORDERED, — That Bill C-71, as amended, be reprinted for the use of the House at report stage.
Pam Damoff gave notice of the following motion:
That the Committee report the following to the House in relation to its study of Bill C-71:
After having studied Bill C-71, An Act to amend certain Acts and Regulations in relation to firearms, the Committee wishes to make the following recommendations to the Government:
a) That as part of the regulatory process, the Government of Canada review the reference process for Possession and Acquisition Licenses to determine both who can be used for a reference, and also to ensure that references are actually checked;
b) That the Minister of Public Safety work with his provincial and territorial counterparts to implement “duty to warn”, which would require medical professionals to advise provincial authorities about persons who have diagnosed conditions that are likely to put the lives of other people in danger;
c) That the Minister of Public Safety Work with his provincial and territorial counterparts to ensure prompt and accurate date transfer of court records of new criminal charges or convictions to the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC) and Canadian Firearms Information System; and
d) That, at the suggestion of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians and other stakeholders, the Government of Canada examine the effectiveness and appropriateness of current individual firearms storage regulations as well as after-hours commercial storage regulations.
Julie Dabrusin gave notice of the following motion:
That the Committee report the following to the House in relation to its study of Bill C-71:
After having studied Bill C-71, An Act to amend certain Acts and Regulations in relation to firearms, the Committee wishes to make the following recommendations to the Government:
a) That the Government of Canada expand research into firearm-related injury and death, including research on the correlation between firearms and suicide and intimate partner violence;
b) That, as raised by the Toronto police and other stakeholders, the Government study mechanisms to identify large and unusual firearms transactions, especially those involving restricted and prohibited guns, to better identify illicit straw purchasing schemes, gang activity, or trafficking operations; and
c) That, at the suggestion of PolySeSouvient, the Government of Canada examine whether it is reasonable for commercial firearms manufacturers to promote the sales of their wares, namely restricted and prohibited weapons, in a manner that particularly glorifies violence and simulates warfare.
At 8:04 p.m., the Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.