JURI Committee Meeting

STANDING COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS

COMITÉ PERMANENT DE LA JUSTICE ET DES DROITS DE LA PERSONNE

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Wednesday, November 19, 1997

• 1535

[English]

The Chair (Ms. Shaughnessy Cohen (Windsor—St. Clair, Lib.)): We're here, and we're back to guns.

We have with us today, from the Department of Justice, Richard Mosley, who is the assistant deputy minister of the criminal law policy and community justice branch. William Bartlett is a legal counsel with the Canadian Firearms Centre. Carolyn Saint-Denis is a senior policy analyst with the Canadian Firearms Centre.

Welcome. I think you know the drill. Go ahead.

Mr. Richard G. Mosley (Assistant Deputy Minister, Criminal Law Policy and Community Justice Branch, Department of Justice): We're pleased to be here today to speak to the final package of key regulations that are required for the initial implementation of the Firearms Act.

This is comprised of six sets of draft regulations. These deal with registration, import and export by individuals, shooting clubs and ranges, gun shows, a special authority to possess in certain situations, and public agents.

[Translation]

As you are aware, the minister tabled an initial package of 11 sets of regulations in late November of last year. Those regulations dealt with a wide range of issues, including: licensing; storage, display and transportation requirements; authorizations to transport and carry; conditions for transferring firearms; aboriginal adaptations; and, fees. In addition to the new regulations which have been tabled, certain significant additions to four of those earlier sets of regulations have also been tabled as part of the current package, and I will address those in a moment.

This committee held extensive hearings and rendered a comprehensive report in February of this year. That report contained 39 recommendations in all, and the value of the committee's work was evidenced when all but one of them were accepted by the government. A government response to the report was tabled in April. The changes agreed to will be implemented when the regulations are made early next year.

[English]

The Firearms Act and all of the supporting regulations will come into force on October 1, 1998. The new Canadian firearms registration system will be tested, and certain advance work, such as the loading of business inventories, will be done between June 1998 and the October 1 commencement day.

When these regulations were tabled, the minister's announcement repeated the policy objective of the entire firearms program initiative, which is to foster a culture of safety for the responsible use of firearms in Canada.

The regulations before you today are an important part of the supporting structure for this program. They have been developed as a result of wide-ranging consultative processes. Many of those who will appear before you as witnesses have been part of that process and have contributed greatly to the development of these regulations, which we believe will be fair and effective.

The review by this committee will be the final step—a very important step—in the development of the regulations. We will endeavour to provide whatever assistance we can to your review. We look forward to your recommendations.

• 1540

The six new sets of regulations comprise a smaller package than was presented to the committee last year, but they deal with a number of key issues, including registration. I propose to briefly summarize the highlights of those.

First is registration certificate regulations. These provide for some of the supporting detail concerning how firearms will be registered. The information that owners will have to provide in order to register their firearms will be dealt with in the form prescribed by the minister. I have a preliminary draft copy of the form for long guns, which has been distributed to you and which we'd be pleased to discuss.

The primary focus of the regulation is those firearms that do not bear a serial number that distinguishes them from other firearms, which we estimate to be up to about 15% only of long guns possessed on commencement day. All but a few firearms with serial numbers will be sufficiently distinguished when the other characteristics set out in the form are added. Firearms with no serial number will be identified by a firearm identification number, or FIN, attached to the firearm by a sticker or by being stamped or engraved on it. Generally stickers will be available as an option for all firearms possessed on commencement day and for firearms in existence on commencement day but imported after that date.

Second is import and export by individuals. I think there's one overriding point to note about the requirements that will apply to firearms moved across the border by individuals. The provisions of the Firearms Act and the regulations with respect to those firearms and that movement will not come into force until January 1, 2001.

Between October 1998 and 2001 Canadian firearms owners will have an opportunity to obtain their licences and have their firearms registered. We will also be working during that period to ensure that the border processes developed for implementation in 2001 are as streamlined and as convenient as possible for both residents and non-resident visitors. Until 2001 the entry of firearms will be governed by a modified customs tariff provision, which will be similar to that which now applies to individuals entering with firearms.

The regulations, when they come into effect, will provide for written declarations as a rule but will also allow for oral declarations in appropriate circumstances. The application of these regulations will reflect the traveller-friendly border processes that are being developed by customs.

[Translation]

The third set of regulations deals with shooting clubs and ranges. These regulations set out standards and requirements for the approval by provincial ministers, as required by the Act, of all shooting clubs and ranges, including long gun ranges. The detailed technical standards will be developed and applied by provincial authorities. The regulations also state that clubs must provide "written descriptions" of the participation in target shooting with restricted firearms of their members, so that these members can show that they have been using these firearms when their licenses are being renewed.

The fourth series of regulations relate to gun shows. The gun show regulations will require all gun shows to have an approved sponsor. They will apply to all gun shows except for certain display-only shows. There are some additional display and record- keeping requirements for shows where sales take place.

• 1545

The fifth set of regulations pertain to the special authority to possess. These regulations deal with certain special situations involving the manufacture and lending of replica firearms used by the movie and theatrical industries. They also provide for some occasional use of grandfathered prohibited firearms at approved shooting ranges.

[English]

As our sixth point, on public agents, the rules that will govern public service agencies, their public officer employees, and people who act on behalf of police forces and other public service agencies are dealt with in the public agents regulations.

“Public agents” is a term coined to cover the public officers and other individuals who will be subject to the regulations. These cover both those firearms owned by the agencies, called “agency firearms,” and those that come into their possession because of seizures, surrenders, and so on, which are called “protected firearms,” and also deal with such issues as storage, recording, training, reporting and disposal.

To return to the additions to the 1996 regulations, as I indicated earlier, those that I have described thus far deal entirely with issues not covered by the package that was tabled in 1996. The development of this further package, however, has made it necessary to make certain significant additions to the regulations tabled last year. Those significant additions have been tabled for review in addition to the new sets of regulations.

The additional elements, which have now been tabled, do not include all of the changes that were made to the regulations that were tabled last year. Minor or editorial changes and changes made in response to the recommendations of this committee will also be made. They do not raise major new issues, but the additions that are before you now do raise such issues. Only the additional provisions have been tabled, but we have provided copies of the full regulations, with the additions shown in bold, for distribution to members of the committee to show the context for the changes.

The changes that have been tabled deal with only three new issues: The first is a verification requirement applicable at the point of first transfer, which is an addition to the transfer conditions regulations; the second deals with the shipping of firearms in the mail and involves additions to both the storage and transportation regulations applicable to businesses and those applicable to individuals; and the third issue involves some new fee items.

First, as to verification on transfer, this additional transfer condition would require firearms owners to have their registration information verified if they sell or give the firearm to someone else. This process respects the simple mail-in registration process, which was promised to individual long gun owners.

Because errors inevitably will be made in such a process, a gradual verification of the information is required over time. Owners will be required to have this information confirmed by an approved verifier only at the point of first transfer and only if it has not been done before, and thus need never have this done if they never sell the firearm. They will be encouraged to have this confirmation carried out at any convenient point, and when they do so they will be issued a registration certificate, at no further charge, that shows that the information has been verified.

The certificate, which we're referring to as a “gold card,” will make them eligible for automated processes at the point of transfer and in regard to the issuance of certain documents. Verifiers will, for the most part, be volunteers in the community and will provide the service at no charge to the owners. Firearms dealers, gun club officers and members, and safety course instructors will be encouraged to become approved verifiers.

It's important to note that the verification requirement would not apply until after January 1, 2003. This deferral will allow existing long gun owners time to register using the mail-in procedure, and time to have their information confirmed voluntarily at the point of registration or at a convenient point thereafter. Only then would there be a requirement that verification occur at the point of transfer.

• 1550

[Translation]

Secondly, Canada Post. The exemption from otherwise applicable storage and transportation requirements, for non-restricted firearms shipped by mail within Canada by individuals and businesses using the most secure means offered by Canada Post, should be good news for firearms owners and businesses. It will make shipping by mail available across the country, and this will be particularly important in rural and northern areas. It will also ensure a reasonable level of security when firearms are shipped in this way, and public safety will thus also be safeguarded. Should there be a strike at Canada Post, private courier companies would continue to offer their services to the public.

[English]

Third, new fee items. The additions to the fee regulations include a fee for business licences for sponsors of gun shows, a reduced fee for legions that possess firearms, and some additional waivers and reductions to mitigate some of the effects of the fees tabled last year.

The new fee tables also provide for the new phase-in periods, where applicable, to reflect the new start-up date. It's been noted, however, that the initial fee of $10 for possession-only licences and $10 for registration of any number of commencement day firearms registered at one time will both be maintained for a full 12-month period.

To illustrate how various aspects of the regulations will work in various circumstances we have prepared some sample scenarios that we expect will be encountered. These will give you a snapshot of how the act and regulations will apply to most firearms owners. I believe those will be distributed to you by the clerk of the committee.

[Translation]

We will also be very happy to answer any questions committee members my have.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[English]

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Ramsay, do you want to start?

Mr. Jack Ramsay (Crowfoot, Ref.): Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Mosley, for your presentation. I understand from looking at these regulations, and from what you've stated today, that the firearm I own.... I do not have a FAC, because I don't require one. I'll have to obtain a licence to own a firearm. Then, in order to register that firearm, I'm going to have to pick up one of these forms somewhere. From where do I get it?

Mr. Richard Mosley: Forms will be made widely available at, for example, post offices, police departments, stores, gun shops, gun clubs and Canadian Tire stores across the country.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: Okay. I fill it out and send it in. Do I get a registration certificate for my firearm?

Mr. Richard Mosley: Yes.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: What happens if I've made a mistake in the serial number?

Mr. Richard Mosley: One of the virtues of the new automated processes that will be put in place is that it will automatically check reference tables for that make and model of firearm, which we will obtain from the manufacturers.

For example, if the number you entered erroneously was never a number used by that company for that model of firearm, the system will automatically kick it out. Somebody then will call you to ask if you could double-check the numbers you submitted.

• 1555

Mr. Jack Ramsay: But what if it's simply an error in one of the digits? If it's a six-digit or seven-digit serial number and you make an error by putting in a 4 instead of a 7, are you telling us that the computer can pick that up?

Mr. Richard Mosley: No. If it's a valid number in the series that was issued for that make and model of firearm, the system is going to accept it unless there's already a firearm of that make and model with that serial number registered to someone else, in which case the system should kick it out.

But if I may say so, the point you're making illustrates the importance of verification at some point. We believe it is necessary to ensure that at some stage the information you have submitted is checked by a third party, particularly if firearms are going to change hands.

Perhaps you belong to a gun club. It may be somebody at the gun club who will look at the information on your certificate and look at the firearm itself and say, “Mr. Ramsay, this is all in order except there's a wrong digit in the serial number here.” That could then be easily corrected.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: But if that doesn't happen, if I am not a member of a gun club and I simply use my firearm for hunting or targeting shooting occasionally, and I'm issued with a registration certificate that doesn't register the firearm, then I'm subject to being charged under the new Firearms Act.

Mr. Richard Mosley: No.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: Is this not true?

Mr. Richard Mosley: No, sir. You will still have a registration certificate for that firearm.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: But it doesn't register my firearm.

Mr. Richard Mosley: It may have a mistake in terms of the serial number on the face of the registration certificate, but it is still a registration certificate.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: But it doesn't register the firearm.

Mr. Richard Mosley: The charge under the new provisions would relate to being in possession of an unregistered firearm. You are in possession of a firearm and you have a registration certificate for that firearm.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: How can you say that when the serial number on the card is not the same as that on the firearm?

Mr. Richard Mosley: It's a palpable error on the face of the certificate which can be easily corrected.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: But that's not my question to you. My question to you is about the fact that we're going to have thousands of bogus registration cards supposedly registering rifles and shotguns when they do not in fact register rifles and shotguns because those registration certificates have been issued without verification of the information.

At present, handgun registration requires that. It requires someone who has some experience in firearm identification to transfer the firearm information required under your schedule, the 10 points of identification from your schedule, into the system. Its certificate is then issued for the registration of that firearm. And even at that time, prior to this, if I had a handgun that the certificate didn't register, that handgun was not registered.

Mr. Richard Mosley: Mr. Ramsay, that is precisely the situation that we have today and have had for many years. There are mistakes in the existing registration certificates issued for handguns, for restricted weapons. In fact, there are far more mistakes than we expect will be the result after these automatic processes are put into place. We do not have a history of people being charged because they are in possession of a handgun registration certificate that has an error on its face.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: But it's still an unregistered firearm. And if my firearm is stolen and ends up at the scene of a crime, they can't trace it back to me because you don't have a registration certificate within the system that allows that to happen.

Mr. William C. Bartlett, (Legal Counsel, Canadian Firearms Centre, Department of Justice): Mr. Ramsay, there are other characteristics that the applicant will be providing the registry on that application form, which in many cases will get very close to clearly identifying the firearm, so with all of the other characteristics in place, a minor discrepancy in the serial number will never be fateful. It is still a registered firearm and we will have a variety of information about that firearm which will identify it for the purposes of registration.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: You mean this is a system that's just asking the gun owners to get close?

Mr. William Bartlett: No, it's a system that asks them—

Mr. Jack Ramsay: Or is satisfied if they get close?

• 1600

Mr. William Bartlett: It asks them to provide their own information. It will give them a guide telling them where to look for the serial number and how to transcribe a serial number. There will be some mistakes made. No system operated by humans, particularly one that is going to be convenient for the gun owners registering, is ever going to be perfect.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: One of the biggest assets claimed by your department, one of the greatest benefits, is the fact you're going to be able to trace back a firearm at the scene of a crime to its registered owner. If it doesn't record the proper serial number, that means when you check it against your system it's not in the system or it's registered to someone else, so how are you going to return that firearm back to its owner if you do not have an accurate serial number registered within the system? It's going to be impossible to do that, or am I seeing something that's not there?

Mr. William Bartlett: It may be possible in some cases if the other characteristics provided get close enough, a search could be done and a simple one-digit error might be revealed.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: But if we look at your make, model, calibre, barrel length, type, action, year, manufacturer, number of shots, in some areas there are thousands and thousands of firearms with all of those identifying features identical. The only thing that will separate them is the serial number, and if the serial number is wrong, there's no possible way you're going to be able to trace it back to its owner. Is that not accurate?

Mr. Richard Mosley: Let me say that certainly verification is an important feature of this package of regulations, and with verification over time the minor errors that are inevitable in any system that involves information inputted by humans will be found and removed from the database. The vast majority of cases will not involve errors.

One thing we found when we assisted the police using the existing restricted weapon registration system in automating the processes is that instead of leaving it to someone filling out multiple forms by hand, by having them on line so that the information was checked against the drop-down information, the reference tables that contain information provided by the manufacturers, you can find those errors often at the start of the process. And often they're errors that relate to the type of firearm. People may own a firearm but not understand what type it is.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: I understand that, but it's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about an honest error made in a serial number. It's not mandatory to verify my firearm unless I sell it or trade it. It's not mandatory under these regulations that there be verification conducted. Therefore, there are going to be thousands of those firearms never verified, the information never verified. Those firearms, if stolen and found at the scene of a crime, if an error has been made in the serial number, are not going to be able to be traced back to its owner, which is one of the very significant benefits claimed by the justice department that this system is going to provide the police forces.

The Chair: That's the 10 minutes, but if you want to comment on that, Mr. Mosley, and then we'll move on.

Mr. Richard Mosley: Although it will not be a requirement if you don't wish to sell a firearm to have it verified, we will certainly be taking considerable steps to encourage people by making it convenient and easy for them to have their firearm information verified.

The Chair: Thanks, Mr. Mosley.

[Translation]

Mr. Pierre de Savoye (Portneuf, BQ): As always, it's a pleasure to be here. Mr. Mosley, you distributed to us copies of the registration application form that will be used. First of all, I see here that this form can be used by residents of Canada and Quebec, as well as by persons who live abroad. Is that correct?

Mr. Richard Mosley: Yes.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: I see that there is a space in item 17 on the form where the verifier can confirm that the information has indeed been verified. Does this verification correspond to the gold card registration certificate that you referred to earlier?

• 1605

[English]

Mr. William Bartlett: This provision is for those who want to voluntarily have their information confirmed when they submit the information. There's simply a place on the form for an approved verifier who has confirmed the information to indicate that on the form so we know at this point that this information has already been confirmed by one of these designated persons.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: That's what I was afraid of. “Voluntarily” is the key word here. That is not indicated at item number 17. Of course, you tell me there's a guide besides that, but it's like your VCR. You read the guide after having used the machine.

Mr. William Bartlett: It does say optional, Mr. de Savoye, and that will certainly be clear in the instructions.

[Translation]

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: In section C, under "Fees", we see that payment can be made either by credit card or by cheque. Is the information to be supplied, for example, the credit card number or the individual's bank account number, also included in the data base identifying the firearm owner?

[English]

Mr. William Bartlett: It's not information, Mr. de Savoye, that we carried on the general database. It will be in the form. The form will be scanned and stored somewhere, but it's not something that will be generally available.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: So if I understand you well, there's no way you could browse through the database and get a credit card number or whatsoever coupled with my name, for instance.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: Don't buy that.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: Mr. Ramsay is telling me not to buy that. Should I?

Mr. Jack Ramsay: And I'll tell you why.

Mr. Richard Mosley: Perhaps I could clarify this. Although it would not be accessible to anyone who would have access to the database from one of the points across the country—for example, a police officer at a site would not be able to gain access to that—the information would be recorded at the central processing site and kept in records there about the application. So they would be accessible to employees of that site.

There will be very strict controls as to who gets access to that information and how it is managed.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: Is it encoded in the database in electronic format, or is this just an image, an electronic picture of the form?

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis (Senior Policy Analyst, Policy and Programs, Canadian Firearms Centre, Department of Justice): The form will be microfilmed and stored, but the information on the credit, and the checks and what not, will not be entered into the computer system.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: That answers my question. I have looked at this. Of course, there are always matters of which you don't see the complexities at once. That is why we will have further witnesses who will point out a certain number of difficulties. But I am sure that at this point in time you are yourself aware of the hot issues that will probably be presented to us.

Could you tell us a little bit about hot issues relating to this certificate?

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: I suppose the one issue that will be of greatest concern is ensuring that our instruction booklets for people are clear so that the initial recording of information will contain as few errors as possible. On this process itself, for a long arm we do not expect too many hot issues, as you say.

I think the issues will revolve more around the reregistration of restricted and prohibited firearms that are currently owned by individuals, or new ones that come into their possession, and how information about those firearms will be verified at first instance or not, as is now the case, because there is no provision in the transfer regulations for verification.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: I take it the guide will be in both official languages.

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: Yes. And more than that.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: What about our friends the natives? How do they react to that?

• 1610

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: It will be available in more languages.

Mr. Richard Mosley: With regard to the information, certainly the material will be made available in a number of aboriginal languages. I believe there is provision for the use of interpreters to assist those who may not speak one of the official languages or a language into which the material is translated.

[Translation]

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: I see here that individuals must use a pen when they complete this form. It's possible that some people may be illiterate or unable to write. What type of support do you plan to offer to these individuals?

Mr. Richard Mosley: In such instances, we will also rely on the use of interpreters.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: Thank you, Madam Chair.

[English]

The Vice-Chairman (Mr. John Maloney): Mr. MacKay.

Mr. Peter MacKay (Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, PC): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I listened very carefully to the propositions put forward by Mr. Ramsay, and I think as a former police officer he probably understands some of the problems that police officers on the street are going to encounter and the significant workload it is going to place upon them in enforcing the regulations.

I don't want to get into the philosophic argument here so much, but throughout the literature I've read the word “safety” used time and time again in reference to these particular regulations. Mr. Ramsay brought up the problems there are with the linkage between a crime scene and a weapon, including, I would suggest, not just the fact that there would be absent-minded or accidental inaccuracies in the identification numbers, but that with the widespread opposition to these regulations there are people who are deliberately going to put false numbers in.

That aside, what other safety elements are there to this registration? What benefits are there?

There's mention here of mailing. I don't see a significant number of guns being posted through Canada Post. I would just like to be enlightened on how the regulations are going to be seen by Canadians as improving the safety of our streets.

Mr. Richard Mosley: I would like to respond to the premise and the honourable member's question about police officers and the time that will be required, and then I will turn to my colleague to speak to the question of the public safety benefits from registration. That was an issue that was addressed in the last Parliament and decided when the legislation was adopted.

With respect to the question of whether police officers will be devoting a lot of time and effort to the administration of this program, with the greatest respect, I think the reality will be quite different. In speaking with members of the police community and presenting to them the model of how this is going to work, the conclusion is to the contrary. In fact, it will save them a great deal of time that is currently being spent on checking applications for firearms acquisition certificates under the current system as amended in 1991-92.

Some jurisdictions will send two officers out to do a check at the household of someone who is applying to acquire firearms for the first time. Perhaps two, three, four hours of police time is spent going to the location, making inquiries, running the CPIC check, and so on to determine whether this individual should be permitted to acquire firearms.

• 1615

The refusal rate is very low. More than 95%—98%—are granted without refusal. There's a huge, inefficient use of police resources with the current system. Under this approach to registration, the screening will be done initially electronically, through automated processes. Only when those find some reason to kick the application out of the system for a secondary or third level of screening will it go back to the local police agency to conduct an inquiry.

So from the police perspective, they are being taken away from what they currently are involved in, which is labour intensive and very resource heavy, and are given back a role that is much more consistent with their primary function, which is investigation and enforcement.

If the system says, for example, this person has a criminal record or this person is known to the police because of problems associated with his or her conduct, the level of inquiry then by the police, or the role of the police, is much more consistent with their primary investigative or enforcement role, as opposed to an administrative processing function, as they currently perform with the FAC system.

Mr. Peter MacKay: But Mr. Mosley, with the greatest respect, by putting these regulations in place, are you not now creating a new level of criminality that never existed, where police officers are being burdened with the enforcement of something people may do inadvertently or out of civil disobedience? You're putting a new level of criminality in this country, and police officers are being burdened with the enforcement of it.

Mr. Richard Mosley: With the greatest respect, Mr. Chair, that was an issue decided in the last Parliament. I'm not sure I can.... I'm here with my colleagues to assist with the regulations, but that's a matter of law.

Mr. William Bartlett: Mr. MacKay, the role of registration in terms of the criminal or the illegal possession of firearms is much broader than you're suggesting simply when a firearm is found by itself at a crime scene.

The purpose of registration is to identify those firearms that are lawfully possessed, and that tells you which firearms are not lawfully possessed. This identification will follow the firearms around as they are transferred, as they cross boarders, and in the case of restricted and prohibited firearms, when they seek authorizations to transport. It will always tell you when a firearm is being lawfully possessed and lawfully dealt with.

Mr. Peter MacKay: But you're talking about lawful use of firearms. This is my question. Where does this tie into the safety element of it—a preventive role?

Mr. William Bartlett: There will be a number of circumstances in which people are found with firearms—and this is where police officers would generally come into contact with these requirements—and the police or conservation officers have some concern. Where they are lawfully possessed, the licence and the registration certificate will tell them that's the case, and then they will be able to identify those cases where it is not.

In cases of illegal trafficking and smuggling, there is a core group on smuggling, involving federal and provincial police officers, that is very keenly looking forward to being able to use the registration system in quite a multifaceted approach to dealing with illicit trafficking inside Canada and smuggling across the border. They feel this would be one key element in all of those efforts.

Mr. Peter MacKay: I suggest it presumes you're going to have widespread participation in this, and my experience in the criminal justice system is criminals are not going to register guns, and for any gun they might have, whether it be a long gun or a pistol, there will be no identification numbers on it at all. So I'm not convinced.

• 1620

My next questions focuses on the cost. There has been widespread coverage in the media and there have been all sorts of rumours going around. The initial figure of $85 million seems to be extremely low, in terms of the department's expectation of how much it's going to cost to implement this. I'd be interested in your comments on that.

Mr. Richard Mosley: The figure of $85 million was provided to the standing committee in April 1995 by Minister Rock as an amount that was estimated to be the cost of setting up the new system—the start-up. At the same time, he laid figures before the committee about what it would cost in any event just to maintain the existing system, which runs at present around $13 million a year.

There will be additional costs. The $85 million figure was an estimate in the spring of 1995. There were changes to the policy as the legislation was going through Parliament. There have been subsequent discussions at great length with the provinces and with groups consulted, particularly on the first set of regulations tabled last year.

Events have occurred that have had an effect upon the design of the new system. I could refer to the Vernon incident in British Columbia, where there was close scrutiny of the existing system for approval of registration of handguns and the related permits and authorizations.

There was also the Bernardo incident in Canada, where it became clear that the police information systems that have been developed in recent years really can't communicate with each other. This system requires the input of data from all of those police agencies, and the ability to communicate from the individual police agencies to the database through the CPIC network.

Mr. Peter MacKay: When you say additional costs, how much more are we talking about, ballpark?

The Vice-Chairman (Mr. John Maloney): We're out of time. Can you respond to that, Mr. Mosley?

Mr. Richard Mosley: I'm not in a position to make a speculative estimate at this point in time.

I might add that we are still in the process of negotiations with the provinces as to the payments that will be made to them for their role in the administration of the program, and still negotiating with companies in the private sector about those portions of it they will be responsible for building. Those are matters of privilege and also matters of cabinet confidence at the moment, since we still require certain approvals in order to proceed with the final stages of the system.

The Vice-Chairman (Mr. John Maloney): Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mr. MacKay.

Mr. DeVillers.

Mr. Paul DeVillers (Simcoe North, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My first question deals with the case when there's no serial number on the firearm and it needs to be registered. I think reference is made to other characteristics that can be identified. What are those other characteristics?

Mr. William Bartlett: The other characteristics, such as make, model, number of shots, barrel length, year of manufacture—in some cases the manufacturer is different from the make—all of those characteristics, together with a serial number, will distinguish that firearm from all other firearms.

If there is no serial number at all, then the person will be issued a firearms identification number. Actually, all certificates will bear a firearm identification number, but if they have a serial number, they won't need to use that number.

If they don't have a serial number, that number will have to be placed on the firearm, either using a sticker, in the case of commencement day firearms, or, into the future, the number will be stamped or engraved on the firearm. There are rules set out in the regulations for that.

That sticker will be provided by the registrar with the registration certificate, where it's been determined that there is no serial number, and therefore they have to attach it, and the person has indicated they want to use the sticker option.

Mr. Paul DeVillers: This is something that's just affixed to the firearm?

Mr. William Bartlett: Yes. Actually, I think we have some examples of it.

The Chair: I think actually the RCMP are going to do this in detail with us, so....

Mr. Paul DeVillers: Are they? Okay, fine.

Mr. William Bartlett: It's quite a small sticker, but it bears the number and will be a self-adhesive sticker much like the kind of sticker you put on your car licence plate when you update it. It will adhere and will be quite sturdy; it will hold up for a very long time.

• 1625

Mr. Paul DeVillers: Okay. My second question was on the members of handgun clubs. The members will have to show that they've been active during every five years or something. What level of activity will they need to show to maintain their status?

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: They'll need to bring a letter or a written description from their club executive to produce for the CFO to show that they have been target shooting at some point during the previous five years. The baseline really is that it has to be a number greater than zero. If it's zero, then there will need to be some explanation. There may be a reasonable explanation as to why the person was unable to target shoot. They may have been away or ill or something, but certainly there are no pre-set indications—

Mr. Paul DeVillers: It won't be once a month—

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: No, absolutely not.

Mr. Paul DeVillers: It just needs to show they've been active....

Thank you, Madam Chair.

The Chair: Thank you. Mr. Ramsay.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: I want to come back to where I left off, which is the supposition that one of the great benefits of this system is that it's going to assist the police, particularly in investing crimes in which firearms have been used, and specifically where the firearm is left at the scene.

I think what you're telling the committee today is that if you're close, it's okay. If you have a registration certificate that doesn't match the firearm but it's close, it's okay. If there's a three instead of an eight, it's okay.

Are you telling us that a court of law would accept that? In other words, this is the certificate that registers this firearm, but the serial number on the certificate doesn't correspond with the serial number on the firearm. Are you telling the committee today that a court will accept that evidence that this certificate registers that firearm? Is that what you're telling us?

Mr. William Bartlett: Indeed, Mr. Ramsay, that's exactly what we're telling you. The court, when presented with a valid certificate, will have no difficulty dealing with minor errors, like when a three has been rendered as an eight in the serial number. That's unless there's some other evidence to indicate that the registration certificate is in some way false or has been altered or fraudulently obtained. The certificate will be simply valid subject to the minor errors apparent on its face.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: I can hardly believe what I'm hearing.

The Chair: I had a case like that, Jack, and I won it.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: You're saying that if the serial number on the registration certificate for a car doesn't match the car, then that registration will be accepted as the registration certificate for that vehicle.

Mr. William Bartlett: As a matter of fact, to follow on with what the chair said, I had a case in which there were a number of errors involved in a series of property documents before a court. This included a car registration, but there was an explanation for the errors, and the court had no difficulty with that.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: It doesn't create an element of doubt.

Then let's go back to this great benefit that the system is supposed to provide to the police. Say they find a firearm at the scene of a crime. It's mine that I had registered, but there is an error in the system. It's not correct. How is the system going to tell the police officer about the owner of that firearm?

Mr. William Bartlett: There will be other characteristics on the firearm. There may be other evidence at the scene. Rarely are you going to have a situation in which the one and only single piece of evidence unconnected to anything else is a firearm or anything else. The firearm will probably be part of a body of evidence that may lead to an identification of the firearm as well.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: We see what the body of evidence is. This is made up of the ten requirements in your document here: make, model, calibre, barrel length, type, action, year, manufacturer, and number of shots. It could refer to thousands of firearms of which the only thing that changes or can identify them is the serial number. Otherwise, you wouldn't be sending out your sticker with a different number on each one of them to people who have firearms without a serial number.

• 1630

I can't believe what I'm hearing here today.

The Chair: Can we just lower the tone a little bit? These people are public servants who have instructions on—

Mr. Jack Ramsay: That's fine, Madam Chair.

The Chair: Mr. Ramsay, just a minute. We don't need to abuse people who come before the committee. You can abuse other politicians, but please be polite with our public servants.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: If my questioning is a form of abuse, I apologize.

The Chair: You're tone is just getting a little hot, and it's going to be a long series of witnesses.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: Just a minute, Madam Chair. Do I still have the full time?

The Chair: You still have time.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: All right.

The Chair: I'm just asking you please to tone it down a little.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: What you're telling us here today is that there's going to be no difficulty in returning my firearm to me if the information in the system is wrong.

Mr. Richard Mosley: Mr. Ramsay, if I may, with the greatest respect, I think you're not accepting the premise in your question that we'll be talking about thousands of firearms.

We may find situations—it happens today—in which the information available to the police narrows the field down to perhaps a handful of firearms. At that point in time, perhaps it will be necessary for the police to return to old investigative methods, such as picking up the phone and calling the people who have a firearm registered in the system that may be one digit different from that which has been found. They can be asked whether their firearm is missing. If it's still in their safe storage in their home, then that eliminates that firearm.

The police work through the list until they find somebody who says their firearm is missing. Or they may have a report of a lost or stolen firearm, and they match that up against the one that has been recovered.

This is what police officers do day in and day out across this country, often with much less information available to them about the article they're trying to identify. Finally, they find somebody who says their firearm is lost or stolen. They reported it to the police. They may be asked if they can describe anything else about it other than it's a Cooey .22 with whatever on it. People can describe their own personal possessions to assist in that process.

With the greatest respect, we are not firearms experts, but I think the assumption you're making, which is that there will be thousands of comparisons to be made, is not accurate. That's something that you may wish to explore with the RCMP forensic experts when they appear.

Nothing we've heard in the past two years suggests to us that we're going to have a big problem with this.

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Mosley. Mr. Lee.

Mr. Derek Lee (Scarborough—Rouge River, Lib.): Thank you.

Just to get really picky on the legal issue raised by Mr. Ramsay, I don't recall the wording in the statute, but would an inadvertently incorrect registration of a firearm be what you would call an absolute liability offence under the legislation?

Mr. William Bartlett: I don't think any of the offences in either the Firearms Act or the Criminal Code are absolute liability offences.

The offence that I think you have in mind for false information is in section 106 of the Firearms Act. It requires that the person has knowingly made a false statement. That's certainly in no way absolutely strict. That's a mens rea offence.

Mr. Derek Lee: Okay. In any offence that might be alleged under this statute, you need to have mens rea. This is probably the only committee in which we can use the term mens rea. So you need to have that.

Mr. William Bartlett: Yes, by the normal rules.

Mr. Derek Lee: An inadvertently incorrect registration, detail, or serial number is.... I can't conceive of a situation—maybe you can—in which a court would find that the person had somehow committed an offence by not properly registering his or her firearm. Is that fair?

Mr. Richard Mosley: That's fair.

• 1635

Mr. Derek Lee: Another area that puzzles me, because it gets really picky, is section 3 of the main regulation here. It has to do with modification, and notification of a registrar following the modification.

I'm not an expert on firearms either, but it seems to me there might be many possibilities of modifying a firearm. There are a lot of exquisite artists out there who work with firearms, and so modifications of any of these facets of a firearm—the barrel, the action, the calibre and these kinds of things—could occur by design, and we take that as a given, I presume.

But what happens when someone modifies the firearm in a way that it can be one of more than one class, depending on what pieces of hardware they have connected to it at any one time?

On Saturday before the gun show, it gets modified to be firearm class A, but for the following week's gun show, or whatever, it gets modified again, and back and forth over a period of time. How does that circumstance fit with this regulation that says when you modify you have to notify?

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: A modification to a class of a firearm is actually fairly substantial, in that you're talking of taking it from non-restricted to restricted, or possibly up to a prohibited level. So you would be talking either cutting off barrels quite a bit, or changing it from a handgun to...you can unscrew barrels, but you don't necessarily frequently go from a handgun to a long gun, non-restricted type.

The idea of this section is that if you do change the class of your firearm so that you are switching out of non-restricted to restricted to prohibited, then you must notify the registrar, because that is a fundamental change in the characteristic of the firearm registered, and we must also check to ensure that you have the appropriate licence to possess that kind of firearm. If you go from non-restricted to restricted, there's a whole new series of steps that you have to go through in terms of licensing. Then the registrar will issue a new certificate and you will charged a half fee, $12.50, for the new registration certificate.

Mr. Derek Lee: I'm still being very picky here, but if you modify it for a day and then switch it back, wouldn't the exception in section 4, which says you only have to notify on the modification if the modification is still in existence a year after, exempt the modifier from notifying and therefore compliance?

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: Section 4 is geared towards the movie industry particularly, because they take fully automatic firearms and convert them down to semi-automatic and what not for the purposes of films, or convert them to blanks. They may or may not leave them in that state for a while, depending on how long the film is going on for which they need the firearm. So we put that section in to accommodate their particular demands.

No one has raised to us yet the possibilities of firearms being converted from class to class as quickly as you have described it.

Mr. Derek Lee: I just raised it. It—

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: If you're thinking of a manufacturer here, this is not something that would affect them, because a manufacturer will report at the moment that the frame/receiver is created, and then after they've turned it into the handgun or whatever, they'll modify that registration to reflect what they have now fully produced. For ordinary individuals, switching from class to class is rather rare.

Mr. Derek Lee: So it's potentially a grey area, but right now we'll fly with the Chevrolet here and see if it works, right?

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Lee.

[Translation]

You have five minutes, Mr. de Savoye.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: You referred in your presentation to the third series of regulations pertaining to shooting clubs and ranges. You state the following in the middle of the paragraph in question:

The regulations also provide for clubs to provide "written descriptions" of the participation in target shooting with restricted firearms of their members, so that these members can show that they have been using these firearms when their licenses are being renewed.

• 1640

I don't recall seeing in the legislation—but it's been a while since I've looked at it—that clubs must provide "written descriptions". Is that new? If so, why was this added? How will clubs and their members who own restricted firearms and want to renew their licenses react to this provision?

I can see

[English]

the linkage, but tell us more about it, please.

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: First of all, the regulations on shooting clubs are new in that a new power is created under this act to provide greater control on their initial establishment and continuing operations, so obviously it's a new requirement that clubs provide this written description at the request of shooters as to their participation in shooting in the previous five years.

It is linked, though, to section 67 of the act, where the chief firearms officer or his agents, obviously, are required every five years at the renewal time of the licence to examine whether people who have handguns registered to them for target shooting have in fact been using them for that legitimate purpose. Collectors will be assessed as well, but in a different way.

The way we saw to best accomplish that was to put the requirement into the shooting clubs' regulations, where people who are target shooters are usually going to be. They're going to be members of the clubs, and that in itself will be proof of activity in target shooting.

If they are members of clubs and if they have gold card registration certificates, they will be able to use the telephone to obtain authorizations to transport for the purposes of going to the shooting clubs on a routine basis. Some provinces will require that the first authorization to transport be issued personally. After that, it may be accomplished by telephone, so it will be quite easy for them, and there's no fee for the authorization.

[Translation]

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: I appreciate the fact that you recognize that this approach seems to meet the objectives being sought. However, my question also had to do with the reaction of shooting clubs.

Have you worked with the clubs on this matter? Do they agree with this approach? Do they consider this measure excessive? As for persons who own these types of firearms, have you been contacted by their associations and what has their reaction been?

[English]

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: In the consultations I carried out with representatives of shooting clubs and shooting organizations, the representatives have not seen this as a problem. In fact, my impression is that they are quite relieved, I would say, that the process is being made as accommodating as it can be to satisfy that legislative objective.

[Translation]

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: Thank you.

[English]

The Chair: Mr. Lee, did you want to pursue this?

Mr. Maloney.

Mr. John Maloney (Erie—Lincoln, Lib.): Mr. Mosley, I just have a few questions about the firearms registration certificate regulations. Is it conceivable that there could be two existing firearms with the same registration number, the same serial number now, and if so, what will you do in that situation?

Mr. Richard Mosley: It is conceivable because the same model of firearm may have been manufactured in two different countries by different factories that put the same number on those firearms. In those circumstances, one of those two firearms would have to have a new and unique number assigned to it. It would be the firearms identification number, and either the sticker with that new number would be put on it or the number would be stamped or engraved on the firearm.

Mr. John Maloney: So whoever gets there first keeps the registration number, so to speak.

Mr. Richard Mosley: Yes.

Mr. John Maloney: In your consultations, has there been much concern about placing these stickers on these firearms? Perhaps some of these firearms are very valuable. Do the users feel this may devalue the firearm?

Mr. Richard Mosley: There's been a lot of discussion about the stickers. There was a lot of discussion about whether there would have to be stamping or engraving first, as opposed to the use of the stickers. The regulations do provide that where the firearm is particularly unique or valuable the sticker can be concealed somewhere on the firearm so it does not detract from the visual appearance of the firearm.

• 1645

You'll see during these proceedings that the stickers we're proposing are actually very small. I have one example with me. You can see it is actually just this black circle. I'll pass it around for your review, and we will give you examples of it.

They are designed to adhere quite well if left alone for 72 hours. Thereafter, they will normally withstand the usual wear and tear that a firearm receives. Even with rough wear and tear in the field, and with the use of cleaning solvents on the firearm, the sticker will remain. It can be removed if someone puts his mind to it, of course.

Mr. John Maloney: The convention we referred to would appear to be in paragraph 7(c) of the regulations. Who is to make the determination about unusually high values for that type of firearm and whether the value would be significantly reduced?

Mr. Richard Mosley: The registrar.

Mr. John Maloney: This is just another question referring to subsection 6(4): does every firearm have a frame or receiver?

Mr. Richard Mosley: Yes. It's the operative part of the firearm.

Mr. John Maloney: Thank you, Madam Chair.

The Chair: Thanks, Mr. Maloney.

I would just remind members that if you have questions, it's a good idea to let me know. I'll keep looking for them.

Go ahead, Mr. MacKay.

Mr. Peter MacKay: Keeping in mind that it appears the regulations have expanded somewhat in terms of the umbrella that is there now for gun clubs, sportsmen, sportswomen, for hunting, I assume it would include Olympic shooting and the weapons that would be used there or in any kind of target shooting. It now also seems to include the movie industry or the theatre. Is it fair to say it includes mock weapons—theatrics, pop guns, squirt guns, cap guns, anything that could be used to resemble the weapon?

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: On the last part, not precisely. Replicas have to exactly resemble with near precision, etc. They have to be very close to a firearm in appearance.

In terms of the offences, yes, it includes imitation firearms, but replicas are not quite as.... But yes, the scope includes any firearm possessed.

Mr. Peter MacKay: I believe Mr. Mosley mentioned the funding that would be involved in having more efficient DNA data banking or a CPIC system. Is that intended to work in conjunction with this firearms registration plan? Has there been thought put into how these two systems of registration could be intertwined—that is, DNA data bank and firearms registration? I guess what I'm asking is if this is the long-term plan.

Mr. Richard Mosley: The DNA data bank will not be accessible through the firearms registration system; however, CPIC itself, the Canadian Police Information Centre system, will be the platform by which law enforcement officers access the information in the registered firearms system. The data bank will be a separate database administered by the RCMP. That, too, will be accessible through CPIC.

We have worked very closely with the RCMP. They are partners in this project, and they have worked with us on a daily basis at the facility we call the Canadian Firearms Centre. They're very much involved, and we're involved with them on their project to modernize the CPIC system. There is considerable interface. Our project managers and technical specialists are working with their project managers and technical specialists.

• 1650

Mr. Peter MacKay: The broader this legislation, or registration in the particular instance we're talking about, the more people it entails, and the greater the pool of revenue.

Mr. Richard Mosley: Yes.

Mr. Peter MacKay: As well, the greater the cost to government in implementation.

Mr. Richard Mosley: There are a number of fixed costs in setting this system up, but in terms of the operating costs, yes, the more that come into the system, the greater the operating costs.

The Chair: Thanks, Mr. MacKay. Monsieur de Savoye.

[Translation]

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: In point number 4 which concerns gun shows, one of the sentences in the French version leaves me somewhat perplexed. I do not, however, have a copy of the English version. Therefore, I will translate into English what is written here in French and we'll see if the meaning is indeed accurate. If it is, then I will need someone to explain this to me. Perhaps the meaning is different, in which case you can tell what the English version says and we'll go with that.

[English]

In the second sentence of your fourth item you say that a regulation will apply to all firearms expositions with the exception of those expositions where the firearms are only in expositions. Are there other kinds of expositions where the firearms are not on expositions?

Mr. William Bartlett: Mr. de Savoye, the regulations divide gun shows into sales gun shows where sales take place, or firearms are offered for sale, and display, where the only activity is display. All sales guns shows are subject to the regulation. Those shows where the only activity is display—they're part of a larger event and are there only for instructional or educational purposes—are exempted. That's what a display gun show is as opposed to a sales show.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: That says it very clearly. I would appreciate having also the English version of everything. Sometimes it's helpful to see how the original was intended.

The Chair: Oh, oh. How do you know the original wasn't in French?

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: I wish I could rely on this on a 50% basis, but usually even French-speaking people, as per the official languages commissioner, write their text in English, unfortunately. Well, that is our federation, isn't it.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh.

[Translation]

Mr. Richard Mosley: If it helps in any way, Mr. de Savoye, you will find this on page 23 of the French version of the regulations.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: Of the bill.

[English]

Mr. Richard Mosley: It provides an explanation, I think, of the choice of words en français.

[Translation]

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: I have another question concerning Canada Post. On the one hand, we note that firearms can be shipped by mail by Canada Post—or what's left of it—without being subject to the same requirements as those imposed on other companies. On the other hand, you indicated that in event of a strike at Canada Post, private courier companies would continue to offer their services to the public. Am I to understand then that courier companies would then be exempted from their normal requirement and would be subject to the same conditions as Canada Post? First of all, why are Canada Post shipping services exempt? Secondly, in the event of a strike, would courier services also be exempt?

Mr. Richard Mosley: The straightforward answer to your second question is no.

[English]

The requirements for the private sector firms will remain the same.

The change was made with Canada Post simply because they are in every corner of the country—every hamlet, every village. It's the distribution of locations. So it's there as a convenience to the public.

Mr. William Bartlett: If I could add to that, Mr. de Savoye, it's in the nature of mail that the post office and its agents simply don't know what's in the mail. That makes it simply impossible for them to comply with requirements regarding how a firearm should be stored overnight, or how it should be transferred. On the other hand, the very anonymity of mail service provides quite a high degree of security for what's in the mail.

• 1655

In our discussions with Canada Post we were advised that the diamond industry has an arrangement with its insurers that allows diamonds to be sent through ordinary parcel post. The delivery record's fairly good. If they do go astray, the insurance company takes the hit, but it finds they sometimes more often go astray when they are being shipped with somebody who knows he or she has diamonds. Somewhere along the way they do go astray.

The exemption has been made necessary by that anonymous nature of mail delivery, but that also provides a fair degree of security when the firearm is in the mail.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: You're getting to my point there. We know that when we put a set of rules in place, people will try to use those rules to their advantage, and that is purely human nature. This is perfectly correct. But sometimes you have adverse effects of this.

We know that a certain number of manufacturers or others that are delivering firearms in bulk were very much worried about the transportation restrictions the regulation might put upon them. Could they turn to

[Translation]

Canada Post and use its delivery service? What would be the consequences for Canada Post and for companies involved in the transportation, among other things, of firearms?

[English]

Are we shifting the business from the commercial business to Canada Post?

Mr. William Bartlett: We would suggest not. The couriers will simply be licensed carriers for general purposes. They will offer some advantages mail does not. They will be able to carry restricted and prohibited items. They will be able to take them across the borders. They will provide a better tracking system. They will provide greater security in some cases, and they will probably be much more appropriate for any kind of large-scale shipment.

We're talking about mailing using something called “security registered”, and there will be some cost to that. It will really only be useful to people when they're simply mailing a small quantity of non-restricted firearms in circumstances where other carriers simply aren't available.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: Have you assurance from Canada Post that it won't try to establish itself in that niche?

Mr. William Bartlett: I think we have a major assurance from Canada Post that it won't establish itself in the niche. It's simply interested in continuing to offer the service, but it's not particularly interested in this service as opposed to any other.

The Chair: Thank you. Mr. Lee, do you have any questions?

Mr. Derek Lee: I'm interested in the central filing of the data from these applications to register firearms. You've said it is going to be maintained centrally in a facility maybe under the same roof as CPIC but close by. It won't be part of the CPIC information system, as I understand it.

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: The microfilm records will be kept in Miramichi for a period of time until they are destroyed. There are destruction policies set out in the firearms records regulations. They may be kept a maximum of ten years, as I recollect.

Mr. Derek Lee: Is there any relationship to the CPIC information system?

Mr. Richard Mosley: There definitely will be an electronic pipeline between Miramichi and the CPIC centre here in Ottawa with a firewall between the two, as my colleague has mentioned. You wouldn't be able to get access to the information that will be stored in Miramichi through the CPIC system.

Mr. Derek Lee: That's what I was getting at. So is the data that's registered in relation to an individual licence to possess or licence to possess and acquire a firearm also being kept in Miramichi?

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: No. The computers are actually in Ottawa, on Alta Vista Drive at CPIC headquarters or the RCMP headquarters. Just entry is occurring in Miramichi.

• 1700

Mr. Derek Lee: What's the relationship between the data kept for licences to possess firearms and CPIC, if any? I realize that's slightly out of order here, but where's that data kept?

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: All the computer data will be kept in Ottawa. It's accessible through CPIC lines for police through their normal CPIC inquiries, and then we also have the separate Canadian firearms registration system, which is a whole computer set-up that will be accessible to certain users.

Mr. Derek Lee: Okay, you've talked about a firewall, so police—

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: There are several firewalls everywhere.

Mr. Derek Lee: And that's probably good; I just wanted to assure myself where the firewalls were, because if I'm a police officer in Moncton or Moose Jaw or London, Ontario and I'm not too sure about the guy who's moved in and has been there for a couple of years, I check him out: does he own a firearm? Can that police officer do that just by clicking into the CPIC system?

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: He can make an inquiry off CPIC and that will go through CFRS to find out.

Mr. Derek Lee: So the police officer will find out, then.

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: CPIC will find out.

Mr. Richard Mosley: We could have one of our specialists on the system come to the table, if that would assist.

The Chair: Please, and perhaps you could make the introduction.

Mr. Richard Mosley: Her name is Lyne Deshaies.

Mr. Derek Lee: Hello. My thrust here has to do with privacy; you've probably caught the drift. So I'm a police officer making an inquiry in the course of my work as a police officer, and I want to know if the person living on concession road number 2 owns a firearm. Is that quickly obtainable, then?

Ms. Lyne Deshaies (Requirements Manager, Canadian Firearms Registration System, Department of Justice): Yes. They do that through CPIC. There will be a subset of the CFRS residing on CPIC, more or less the same as they have right now, with the restricted weapons system. They have only a subset of the information; they don't have access to the full system.

Mr. Derek Lee: The data on this particular application form is appropriately thin, light, basic—name, address, etc.—and that's okay, but the data in relation to licensing for possession, etc., is much more in-depth. So what if the policeman in Moose Jaw wants to dig deeper and find out if the person has a licence to possess and inquires about other information in relation to this routine inquiry? How deep can he or she go?

Ms. Lyne Deshaies: They only have access to the subset of information residing on CPIC, so they will have access maybe to the licence and the privileges attached to the licence, but not everything else CFRS has on the application.

Mr. Derek Lee: So they can't find out who else is living in the house, what age they are, and that type of thing, which might otherwise be obtainable in the data that came in with the licence to possess. Am I right?

Ms. Lyne Deshaies: It's based only on the individual. They can have information, but not on everything else that was attached with the application. They'll have access to information pertaining to the individual, because they have a licence and because they have a registered firearm, but everything else that was required to make the application is part of CFRS, and that's not part of the subset on the CPIC.

Mr. Derek Lee: Is that assured? Are you saying to us that that bunch of personal information—and I haven't listed it all here yet—which a policeman might like to get, for whatever purpose, in the course of his or her work is not obtainable in a routine inquiry through CPIC as described here?

Mr. Richard Mosley: My understanding is it's not obtainable in a routine inquiry. However, if that officer is conducting an investigation and goes to the firearms officer for that force or the chief firearms officer for the province, the officer could be authorized to gain access to the full data set.

Mr. Derek Lee: So there is a modest check, but not a full one—not a complete, comprehensive one. It's possible to get at the data, is that correct?

Mr. Richard Mosley: It is, but only by going through the authorized channels. And of course a record would then be kept of the fact that the officer had made that inquiry. The officer would have to provide a valid reason for wanting to get access to the information.

Mr. Derek Lee: And because it's an inquiry from a peace officer, a police officer, that would routinely be exempted from laws we have governing privacy.

Mr. Richard Mosley: Yes.

• 1705

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Lee. Mr. Ramsay is next.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: Yes, I would like to touch a little bit on this form and, if we have time, go on to shooting and gun shows. But before I do, I would like to ask just one final question.

I understand the witnesses are not able to deal with the matter of cost for the program.

The Chair: They gave an answer. I wasn't chairing at the time, but—

Mr. Jack Ramsay: Yes. They can't be specific, so I would ask that a minister or someone from the department who can respond to questions on the cost of the program be made available.

The Chair: Are you saying you're not satisfied with the answers that you got?

Mr. Jack Ramsay: They declined to respond to Mr. MacKay's request for a ballpark figure.

The Chair: With respect, what they said was that they are still negotiating with the provincial governments and that, as a result of that, they consider it to be privileged while those negotiations are going on.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: That was part of it, but there was more.

Okay, if—

The Chair: We can discuss it afterwards.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: Yes.

This is my final question on this registration part. Again, you may not be able to answer, but some other witness may be able to fill in. If a firearm is found at the scene of a crime and the police run the 10 identifying features on that firearm through the system and it comes up negative, I would assume that the police officer would assume that it's unregistered. Would that be correct?

Mr. Richard Mosley: I think the officer would be put on to further inquiries at that point in time. I'm not sure that an officer would draw the conclusion immediately that it was unregistered.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: Okay.

With regard to these forms, what information from these forms will go into the system?

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: All of the information on the form except the credit information will go into the computer system. The system merely records that the the appropriate fee has been paid. But all the rest of it is essentially a description of the firearm, along with verification dates, if that in fact has occurred. All of that would be entered into the system or matched against other system records, like the name, the address, and what not.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: Okay. Where will the other information that's not going into the system be kept?

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: The forms themselves will be microfilmed for the storage period that's dictated by the records regulations. For registration it's forever, I believe. We keep the information on firearms forever.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: Would they be kept at the local—

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: No. They'll be kept in Miramichi.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: So they're kept within the system itself but are not accessible through a CPIC check?

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: No. The form is going to be on microfilm, so if you want to see the whole form you're going to have to read—

Mr. Jack Ramsay: Who would have access to that?

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: Only the designated people at Miramichi, I assume. CFOs, generally speaking, because these are their records, but they're being stored for them by the registrar in Miramichi. That's all.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: To follow up on the question from my colleague from the Bloc, is that a secure system? Is that system secure in that this kind of personal information would not be available to the wrong people or get into the wrong hands?

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: It's supposed to be extremely secure in terms of people who have access to it, who have legitimate reasons why they may have access to it. And the physical storage place and so forth is as secure as we can make it.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: Okay.

For just a minute, I would like to turn to the gun shows. Why has the department regulated the gun shows? Have problems that require federal regulation been identified, safety problems or other problems, smuggling problems or whatever, with gun shows?

• 1710

Mr. William Bartlett: There certainly have been problems reported in the past. Gun shows occur in a variety of circumstances, from flea market situations on weekends at convenient crossroads up to much more highly organized affairs. Certainly at the one extreme there have been a number of problems noted and even the better organized shows have experienced some difficulties. All of that led to a provision in the act that provided for the regulating of gun shows as part of the overall program to provide for safe use of firearms.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: Today, prior to these regulations, a gun show is regulated by provincial regulations?

Mr. William Bartlett: Yes. At this point it's largely a matter of provincial regulation of gun shows. There are aspects of the current law that do apply to a gun show.

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: I'd like to add a little bit to that. It's really regulated by way of provincial policy right now. There are not regulations per se. The practices vary rather considerably as to what goes on from one province to another.

There have been complaints from businesses about different fees being levied for their participation in gun shows depending on which province they're from and the fact that individuals and collectors can compete with them, if you like, at a gun show and not have to pay any kinds of fees. There have been disparate practices in terms of security requirements and what not so there was generally expressed a need to bring some order to the area of gun shows by way of regulation that would standardize and introduce some national norms.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: So there has been a deficiency in regulation at the provincial level?

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: Generally speaking, there aren't regulations per se at the provincial level. There's a deficiency in standard practices or policies in trying put into effect the provisions of the current law.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: Has this resulted in a public safety problem?

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: There are public safety concerns in that in some cases you have large numbers of firearms being handled in public places, with police and others not being aware that it's going on and no particular supervision occurring of the site and things like that. It is a matter of concern to officials.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: Well, of course—

The Chair: Mr. Ramsay, we're at about eight minutes now.

Mr. MacKay.

Mr. Peter MacKay: Maybe I can just follow up on what Jack's talking about.

Again, the emphasis is on the safety here. You spoke of broad, widespread consultation. I have no doubt that it occurred, but is there any connection here between crime rates and the use of long guns in the commission of offences? This is aside from just being in possession of them illegally. I'm talking about actual use in the commission of an offence. Have there been statistics that went into the formulation of these to back up the need for regulations?

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: You're not talking about the gun shows now. Are you talking about in general?

Mr. Peter MacKay: I'm talking about in general.

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: Yes. We should produce for the committee some of the research information, which generally tends to show that long guns are involved more heavily in crimes than handguns. I don't have statistics here today, but we can produce that.

Mr. Richard Mosley: We've done site studies across the country with the assistance of the police departments. I'm not sure if we have anybody from our research section here, but we can make that information available.

The Chair: Is the whole section here, the whole department?

Mr. Richard Mosley: Just a representative cross-section.

The Chair: You've left someone there to answer the phone, I hope.

Mr. Richard Mosley: We get lots of calls.

Mr. Peter MacKay: I would be very interested to see the statistics, because with all respect, that's not the information I'm getting from the rank and file police. Long guns are not the weapon of choice for knocking over a corner store or a liquor store. It's not rifles.

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: It's the sawed-off shotgun.

Mr. Peter MacKay: Well, that's a restricted weapon, anyway.

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: No, it's a prohibited weapon. It's an illegal weapon. It's a long gun that has been chopped down. Because it's easier to get a shotgun than to get a hand gun, that's generally what happens. We can produce some information for you.

Mr. Peter MacKay: I would suggest it's a gun that's never going to be registered.

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: Not if they saw this form.

• 1715

Mr. Richard Mosley: Anyone found in possession of that without a registration certificate will be subject to prosecution.

Mr. Peter MacKay: Well, the simple possession of it isn't the one they're going to do time for.

I'm going to ask a very simple question. It's not meant to be facetious, and I hope it's not anything that will offend you. How would the registration of a long gun have prevented the massacre in Montreal, or how would it have prevented any sort of domestic violence involving a rifle?

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: I think the licensing system and screening procedures that we're putting in place might have been the first step to help in that case. If the full system that we have envisaged for today had been in place, Lépine should not have gotten an FAC or a licence in the first place, because he couldn't have gotten the references. There were enough indicators otherwise.

Mr. Peter MacKay: That's if he had gone through legal channels.

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: He did. He had an FAC.

Mr. Peter MacKay: Well, in that example, that's fine. But in examples in which a person, a lone gunman, takes a rifle and commits a heinous act, how is having the gun registered going to actually prevent the commission of an offence, whether or not he has an FAC, whether or not he's gone through proper channels?

Ms. Carolyn Saint-Denis: You can't always prevent everything, but one of the assets of registration is that it will encourage individuals to be more responsible and accountable for their particular firearms. They will have to know where those firearms are, whether or not they're safely stored, whether or not they have lent them to someone who can be relied upon. If we can tighten that up initially, we will reduce the availability of firearms through theft or just casual ownership. I think that's one of the things we're counting on.

Mr. Peter MacKay: Could that be done equally effectively through education, rather than creating the very complicated, red-tape level of bureaucracy that we have here?

Mr. Richard Mosley: With the greatest respect, Madam Chair, I think that question was decided by Parliament. As you noted earlier, we are acting on the instruction to implement that decision. If Mr. MacKay would like to come over to the firearms centre sometime, we'd be happy to give him a full presentation on all of the background history of the matter, but I'm not sure it assists the committee in it's review of these regulations.

The Chair: Mr. Mosley, just on a related matter—and while we have you here and can nail you down—I would assume that any Department of Justice facilities that new members have not had an opportunity to visit, or any briefings that they've not had an opportunity to have, could be made available either directly through you or through the minister's office. Is that fair to say?

Mr. Richard Mosley: Of course.

Mr. William Bartlett: Briefings were offered, and you can take us up on the offer at any time, Mr. MacKay.

The Chair: Thank you, and thank you too, Mr. MacKay.

Mr. de Savoye.

[Translation]

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: Madam Chair, I would like to come back to Mr. Lee's question and put it to our computer specialist. Would that be possible?

[English]

The Chair: You can ask them all. There are a whole bunch of them here, and they all have stickers on.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: I don't have questions for all of them, but I'm sure they have plenty of answers for me.

The Chair: All right.

[Translation]

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: Earlier on, you stated that the data set to which a police officer would have access would be a subset of a full data set.

Ms. Lyne Deshaies: That's correct.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: There are two ways we can proceed: either we give the police officer access to a subset taken from a full data set, or we copy this subset and make it available on site. Which of the procedures do you plan to follow?

Ms. Lyne Deshaies: We plan to follow the second one.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: A partial copy is made then.

Ms. Lyne Deshaies: That's right. At present, there is a subset of information on CIPIC which contains information about restricted weapons. We plan to proceed in exactly the same manner.

Furthermore, an official from the Privacy Commissioner's office is helping us to determine exactly what information can be made available. We are also working with the police community.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: That's fine. You should pass this on to the Human Resources Development Minister.

Ms. Lyne Deshaies: Thank you.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: There are now several types of information that can be requested from a data set. As Mr. Lee mentioned, we can inquire as to whether Mr. so-and-so owns a firearm. Obviously, to get an answer to this type of question, I need a key word to access this system. That could be the name, first name or most likely the address or date of birth as well.

Ms. Lyne Deshaies: Yes.

• 1720

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: If I look at your form, it doesn't appear that the address is part of the access code. It's the date of birth that truly sets one person apart from another.

Ms. Lyne Deshaies: To our knowledge, the starting point of most of the searches conducted using police computer databanks is a name and date of birth. Occasionally, the address is used as well.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: If I understand correctly, a police officer wanting to know if there is a firearm in the residence at No. 1033 on concession road 2 would be unable to obtain this information.

Ms. Lyne Deshaies: He could obtain this information by using the address to key in his search.

Mr. de Savoye: Then there is another means of accessing the system.

Ms. Lyne Deshaies: Yes.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: Are there other ways?

Ms. Lyne Deshaies: I cannot answer that question. Work is under way to finalize the entire computer system. However, to meet past commitments, we fielded requests to search the data bank from police officers conducting firearms searches and information such as the name, address and date of birth of persons was provided to us.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: For example, would it be possible for me to ask how many .22 calibre rifles there are on 7th avenue?

Ms. Lyne Deshaies: This isn't possible with the CPIC system. Information can be obtained using an address. Individual searches may be carried out on the basis of a name, an address and so forth. It's not possible to conduct a global search using the procedure you described. If police officers wish to do so in the context of a broader investigation, they have to follow the proper line of authority, because records...

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: Who could authorize a search of this nature?

Ms. Lyne Deshaies: The various lines of authority would have to be contacted because the information belongs to the firearms officer in each province and to the proper police authorities. Their permission would be required before going ahead with the search.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: I'm going to ask a very delicate question, but one that I feel is very important. A computer system needs to be maintained. Do some programmers occasionally use the on-line file to conduct certain tests?

Ms. Lyne Deshaies: No, maintenance and tests are always carried out using another data set, not the actual data.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: That answers my question. Thank you.

[English]

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. de Savoye. Mr. Ramsay, I'm going to let Mr. Maloney go and then I'll give you the last word.

Mr. John Maloney: I have a couple of questions on importation by non-residents, and I'm specifically referring to hunters coming to Canada to hunt.

It provides for declarations to be made in person and in writing and then it goes on to say “except if you can allow it orally”. Is it possible for an American hunter envisaging a trip to Canada to call up the customs and make a declaration over the phone so that when he reaches the border there wouldn't necessarily be lengthy complications crossing with his weapons?

Mr. William Bartlett: There will always be the opportunity to advise customs in advance either in writing or orally that you're coming and what you're bringing.

The provision in the regulations is intended to deal with the actual point of reporting when they cross, but on an administrative basis the forms by which they will provide the information that's required will be made generally available, and they will be encouraged, where they know they're coming, to provide the information in advance so that at the actual point of crossing it can be handled quite quickly.

Mr. John Maloney: How do these regulations dovetail with existing customs regulations on importations by non-residents? Are they more restrictive or the same?

Mr. William Bartlett: The new sections of the act, and the supporting regulations when they come into force on January 1, 2001, will create a new set of rules. We'll add some additional steps, including a declaration to fill out with the basic personal information and the information about the firearms. That will be additional to what they do now, yes, but when the system is up and fully functioning it will be part of the entire Canadian firearms registration system where, if information has been provided in advance, it can be taken off the system quite quickly.

For those who cross regularly, where they are on the system and the firearms they bring across are on the system, the actual crossing can be handled quite quickly using the automated systems. In some ways, because of the automated nature of the system, the fact that customs will be hooked up to the CFRS, the crossings may be easier.

• 1725

The Chair: Thanks, Mr. Maloney. Mrs. Bakopanos and then Mr. Ramsay.

Ms. Eleni Bakopanos (Ahuntsic, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair.

Picking up on what Mr. MacKay said, I was wondering if it was possible to provide the committee with evidence in other countries, if they exist, in terms of tougher gun control leading to a decrease in violent or domestic crime. I think some statistics do exist. Perhaps we could make those available to the committee.

Secondly, it would be nice to also have a comparison in terms of other countries and where Canada actually falls. Does it fall in the middle in terms of the type of gun control legislation we have or regulations? Are we going to one extreme or the other or are we somewhere in between? It might be very useful for our discussions.

Mr. Richard Mosley: Madam Chair, we could provide, for example, the report of the United Nations study that was completed late last year or early this year, which has very up-to-date information about what other countries are doing about firearms control. We could certainly make that available to the committee.

The Chair: I would remind colleagues—and I appreciate that there are new people and they haven't had a kick at this—but we've been kicking this can for a long time, and if we're going to be effective in terms of looking at and studying and, if necessary, amending the regulations, I am urging you to stick to the regulations and not to the general theory.

Anyway, Mr. Ramsay.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: Thank you, Madam Chair.

According to the regulations, we should be able to start registering our firearms the October 1, 1998. Does this mean that the system will be up and running then? Will everything be in place by that time?

Mr. Richard Mosley: In fact, the system will be up and running by June 1998 and during the subsequent four months we will be running tests on the system. We'll be collecting information; for example, business inventories held at that time may be inputted in advance of that commencement date. There are a number of things we could do post-June 1. I had a description of it at hand, and if you'll bear with me for a second, I could describe some of those things.

All firearms businesses such as retail outlets, gunsmiths, manufacturers and pawn shops could apply to register their inventories of firearms and prohibited devices in the system and those registrations would be recorded in the database. That could be done. The system will have the facility to do it by way of electronic transmission from large enterprises, large-volume businesses, the computer disk for medium-volume businesses, and by other means for the small operators.

Applications for shooting club and shooting range approvals could be submitted during that period of time to the CFO offices in each province and could be processed in advance of the October 1 date so there's no delay in their approval coming into effect as of that time. They would be able to continue to operate for some time after the commencement date, but this would give them the option of applying for approval in advance of October 1.

Applications for carrier licenses could be submitted to the registrar and could be processed in advance of October 1, and businesses wishing to import or export could apply for authorizations to do that during this time period as well.

Also, if anybody wants to write in at that time to make an application to register—we have reason to believe that a great many people will want to do it early rather than late—we will receive those applications, and if we have the capacity at that time we'll process them in advance of October 1, although the actual licence will not be issued until October 1. Also, applications for authorizations to transport and carry could be made during that time period as well.

• 1730

So to the extent possible, anything we can do before the commencement date we will endeavour to do during the four-month period. But the system, the central processing site in Miramichi, will be up and running as of June.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: Then you have made whatever arrangements were needed in order to fill in for those provinces that have opted out of the system?

Mr. Richard Mosley: Yes.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: So you're ready to go in those provinces, as well?

Mr. Richard Mosley: We believe we will be ready to go as of the commencement date in those provinces, working with the RCMP, who will be the service delivery agent for the system.

On the assumption that in each of those provinces the provincial minister, who under the act is authorized to appoint a chief firearms officer, will not do so for Bill C-68, the act gives the authority to the federal minister to appoint a chief firearms officer for those provinces. So there should be no loss of service.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: Has that been done in those provinces?

Mr. Richard Mosley: They have given notice that they will withdraw from administration, effective the coming into force of Bill C-68.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: So then in my province, where they're opting out, will I be able to register my firearm as of October 1, 1998?

Mr. Richard Mosley: Yes.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: So you'll have your federal CFO in place by then?

Mr. Richard Mosley: Yes.

Mr. Jack Ramsay: Okay, that's all I have.

The Chair: Thanks, Jack.

I want to thank all of the officials who came. I'm sorry we didn't give you all a shot at testifying here, but we were glad to have you, kidding aside.

And thank you very much, Mr. Mosley, Ms. Saint-Denis, and Mr. Bartlett.

We adjourn until tomorrow morning at 11 a.m.