Skip to main content Start of content

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.

Previous day publication Next day publication

Minutes of Proceedings

42nd Parliament, 1st Session
Meeting No. 119
Thursday, June 7, 2018, 11:06 a.m. to 1:09 p.m.
Presiding
Hon. John McKay, Chair (Liberal)

House of Commons
• Olivier Champagne, Legislative Clerk
• Jacques Maziade, Legislative Clerk
 
Library of Parliament
• Tanya Dupuis, Analyst
• Dominique Valiquet, Analyst
Department of Justice
• Paula Clarke, Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section
• Nicole Robichaud, Counsel
Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
• Randall Koops, Director General, Policing and Firearms Policy
Royal Canadian Mounted Police
• Rob O'Reilly, Director, Firearms Regulatory Services, Canadian Firearms Program
Pursuant to the Order of Reference of Wednesday, March 28, 2018, the Committee resumed consideration of Bill C-71, An Act to amend certain Acts and Regulations in relation to firearms.

The Committee resumed its clause-by-clause study of the Bill.

The witnesses answered questions.

The Committee resumed consideration of Clause 2 , of the amendment of Pam Damoff and of the subamendment of Arnold Viersen previously stood.

By unanimous consent, the subamendment was withdrawn.

By unanimous consent, the amendment was withdrawn.

Pam Damoff moved, — That Bill C-71, in Clause 2, be amended by adding after line 4 on page 2 the following:

“(2) Subsection 5(2) of the Act is amended by striking out “or” at the end of paragraph (b) and by replacing paragraph (c) with the following:

(c) has a history of behaviour that includes violence or threatened or attempted violence or threatening conduct on the part of the person against any person;

(d) is or was previously prohibited by an order — made in the interests of the safety and security of any person — from communicating with an identified person or from being at a specified place or within a specified distance of that place;

(e) in respect of an offence in the commission of which violence was used, threatened or attempted against the person's intimate partner or former intimate partner, was previously prohibited by a prohibition order from possessing any firearm, cross-bow, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device or prohibited ammunition; or

(f) for any other reason, poses a risk of harm to any person.

(3) Section 5 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (2):

(2.1) For greater certainty, for the purposes of paragraph (2)(c), threatened violence and threatening conduct include threats or conduct communicated by the person to a person by means of the Internet or other digital network.”

Debate arose thereon.

At 11:20 a.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 11:25 a.m., the sitting resumed.

The debate resumed.

At 12:22 p.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 12:33 p.m., the sitting resumed.

Sean Fraser moved, — That the amendment be amended by adding, after the words “that place”, the words “, and presently poses a threat or risk to the safety and security of any person”.

Debate arose thereon.

The question was put on the subamendment of Sean Fraser and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pam Damoff, as amended, and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:

YEAS: Pam Damoff, Matthew Dubé, Peter Fonseca, Peter Fragiskatos, Sean Fraser, Richard Hébert, Glen Motz, Pierre Paul-Hus — 8;

NAYS: — 0.

Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 3, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-71, in Clause 2, be amended by adding after line 4 on page 2 the following:

“(2) Section 5 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (2): (2.1) In determining whether a person is eligible to hold a licence under subsection (1), a chief firearms officer or, on a reference under section 74, a provincial court judge shall consider whether the person was, at any time, prohibited by a prohibition order from possessing any firearm, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device or prohibited ammunition in relation to an offence in the commission of which violence was used, threatened or attempted against their intimate partner.”

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because a similar amendment was adopted.

Glen Motz moved, — That Bill C-71, in Clause 2, be amended by adding after line 4 on page 2 the following:

“(2) Section 5 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (2):

(2.1) For the purposes of determining eligibility under subsection (2), in the case of an individual who is applying to renew a firearms licence or who has held a firearms licence within the previous year, only the previous five years shall be taken into account.

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: 5.

Clause 2, as amended, carried on the following recorded division:

YEAS: Julie Dabrusin, Pam Damoff, Matthew Dubé, Peter Fonseca, Peter Fragiskatos, Richard Hébert — 6;

NAYS: Blaine Calkins, Glen Motz, Pierre Paul-Hus — 3.

At 1:09 p.m., the Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.



Jean-Marie David
Clerk of the Committee