Hon. Hassan Yussuff: Yesterday, due to the adjournment, I was stopped in the middle of my speech so, to remind colleagues, I was talking about guns.

I think most Canadians in this country would agree that guns that belong on the battlefield should not be in the hands of Canadians. There is an effort of the government to ensure that, in this bill, those guns will be addressed. This will provide clarity for owners and manufacturers, and prevent entry into the Canadian market of new models of these particularly dangerous firearms once Bill C-21 comes into force.

In addition to legislative measures, regulatory changes will require a Firearms Reference Table record for all firearms, not just prohibited and restricted firearms, before entering the market in Canada. That would help to ensure that no firearm enters the Canadian market unaccounted for or incorrectly classified.

I’d also like to point out that, as we address the decades-old issue of firearms classification, the government has committed to re-establishing the Canadian Firearms Advisory Committee to independently review the classification of existing firearms. As the government completes the measures against assault-style firearms, it is working to strengthen the regulation on large capacity magazines. That will require long gun magazines be permanently altered so they can never hold more than five rounds. The regulation will ban the sale or transfer of magazines capable of holding more than the legal number of bullets.

Colleagues, these are some of the main measures of Bill C-21. I want to emphasis the measures in this bill are not to be viewed as the government’s sole strategy to combat gun violence in the country.

I would like to now speak to some of the other measures the government has and will undertake to combat firearms violence. I think it’s important to appreciate that this is just one element of an overall larger strategy to address gun violence.

Since 2016, the government has invested more than $1.3 billion in measures to address gun violence and keep guns out of the hands of gangs and criminals in our country. The government is supporting the development of new gun and gang violence prevention and intervention initiatives, which we have seen rolling out across the country over the past few years.

In fact, the government has committed $250 million to support the efforts of municipalities and Indigenous communities to build and deliver anti-gang programming. This is funding that builds on the almost $330 million provided to the provinces and territories under the 2018 Initiative to Take Action Against Gun and Gang Violence to combat gun and gang crimes.

I would also add that the government announced an extension and expansion of the program with $390 million over five years through the Gun and Gang Violence Action Fund. That funding goes to the provinces and territories for a variety of initiatives, including support for law enforcement and prevention programs.

In addition to providing funding to address the root causes of crime, the government knows that the cross-border smuggling of firearms also poses a threat to the safety and security of Canadians. Through Budget 2021, the government invested $656.1 million over five years for the Canada Border Services Agency to modernize our borders, including enhancing our ability to detect contraband and help protect the integrity of our border infrastructure. All of this is in addition to legislation.

Honourable senators, I would now like to take a few moments to discuss some of the issues raised in our committee’s study of the bill.

Our committee held nine meetings over the past two months, hearing from 66 witnesses, including the minister and his officials, Indigenous organizations and governments, academics, researchers, selected firearms officers, representatives from gun rights and gun-control advocacy groups and law enforcement agencies.

I think it is fair to say that, by and large, the gun groups do not support the legislation, while gun-control groups and many law enforcement agencies do.

I, like many witnesses who support this bill, know it is not a panacea and that there are many aspects of combatting and effectively reducing gun violence in the country. However, all the advocates for gun control agreed that this bill is an important part of reducing gun violence, and all supported the passage of the bill without amendments.

As Wendy Cukier, a co-founder of the Coalition for Gun Control, has said:

No law is ever perfect but Bill C-21 is a game changer for Canada and should be implemented as soon as possible. The law responds to most of the recommendations of the Mass Casualty Commission and demands of the Coalition for Gun Control (CGC), which, with more than 200 supporting organizations, has fought for stronger firearm laws for more than thirty years.

We have heard from Emma Cunliffe, former Director of Research and Policy at the Mass Casualty Commission, who said that Bill C-21 had many of the recommendations made by the Mass Casualty Commission’s report. We also heard from women’s groups who spoke to the importance of the “red flag” and “yellow flag” provisions to protect women and help address the epidemic we face in intimate partner violence in this country.

The National Association of Women and the Law was clear on the legislation. They said:

We support Bill C-21 and recommend its quick adoption. While weaker in its original form, the bill now contains stronger measures to protect women who are victims of family and intimate partner violence. . . .

We also heard from law enforcement representatives, including Fiona Wilson, Deputy Chief Constable at the Vancouver Police Department. Deputy Chief Constable Wilson said generally of the bill:

I think the bill strikes a good balance between respecting the rights of lawful gun owners and also giving police more tools to address violence associated with guns in this country.

More specifically on the “ghost gun” provisions, she said:

As I mentioned, there is a lot in this bill that is important with respect to ghost guns. Of course, we’re never going to be able to completely eliminate the ability of people to create privately manufactured firearms, but I think the provisions in this bill will go a long way to assist police with investigation avenues and tools that we can use to try and investigate these types of situations, and hold offenders accountable when we do come across them, either manufacturing ghost guns or in possession of them.

Senators, we heard some legitimate concerns about the bill in our study, and I want to address three of them, specifically, the issue of chief firearms officers in the North, firearms instructors for the Canadian Restricted Firearm Safety Course and Indigenous consultations.

Colleagues, several representatives from the North raised the issue that the chief firearms officers responsible for the North are not located in the North. The northern territories are the only jurisdiction where this is the case. Ensuring the chief firearms officers who have responsibility for the northern territories have a genuine understanding and appreciation of the North’s uniqueness by having them located in the North is not only a legitimate concern but also a minimum requirement of these officials. I don’t think anyone would disagree with this, because it is an important issue of fairness, equity and respect.

Natan Obed, President of Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, during a November 6, 2023, appearance before our committee, explained it best when he said:

The distance is more than geographical; it is also cultural and practical. We must ask whether such officials can adequately assess and understand the unique circumstances and necessities of Inuit hunters. . . .

I was very pleased to have Minister LeBlanc address this issue head-on in his letter to the committee. As I mentioned earlier, we received it two days ago. The minister stated the following in his letter:

Chief Firearms Officers (CFO) and their teams have an important role to play in the safe and lawful use of firearms in each province and territory.

In that regard, I have heard the views expressed by Honourable Senators, as well as by witnesses, regarding the presence of CFOs in the territories, and the importance of place-based knowledge.

I am committed to addressing this issue and will work with the Premier of each of the territories to do so.

The minister shared with us his letter to one of the premiers, which stated:

Pending the outcome of appropriate consultation with your government, I would like to appoint a resident CFO in your territory. I would value the opportunity to understand your views to ensure the unique circumstances and needs of the Northwest Territories and its communities are met.

I believe, colleagues, the minister is committed, in good faith, to agree with the wishes of the North when it comes to the issue of chief firearms officers for the North that was raised in our study.

Another issue raised was the concern related to the effect the handgun freeze will have on firearms instructors who provide the Canadian Restricted Firearm Safety Course. It is a legitimate concern because we will need a reliable number of instructors in the future to put on these courses, whether that is to ensure sports shooters who want to participate in the Olympics or in the Paralympics handgun shooting events have the ability to get their restricted licence or to ensure individuals who want to become guards in the armoured car industry, or even CBSA guards, have the same ability.

The minister also addressed this concern in his letter to the committee by stating:

I have heard your concerns regarding firearms instructors, and ensuring that they are able to access the firearms they need to safely deliver training. As the operational model of firearms instructors vary across the country, I have tasked officials to work with relevant organizations to explore options to support the delivery of this important service. Firearm instructors are vital to keeping firearm owners and communities in Canada safe.

Finally, frustrations were expressed by a number of stakeholders, in particular Indigenous organizations and governments, with the lack of meaningful consultation when Bill C-21 was being developed, in particular, concerning the new technical definition of “prohibited firearm” related to assault-style weapons.

I want to remind colleagues that a new definition was not included in the original bill, and it was only added in clause-by-clause consideration at committee in the other place.

I believe strongly that the government has a duty to consult Indigenous people if the legislation will affect them. That is why the government included a non-derogation clause as an amendment to the bill in the other place.

The minister’s letter of two days ago also addressed this concern regarding the need for meaningful consultation in the creation of regulations for this bill. He stated:

While Bill C-21 will not abrogate or derogate from the rights of Indigenous Peoples as affirmed in the Constitution, the Government of Canada must meaningfully consult with Indigenous Peoples.

Should proposed regulations have the potential to adversely impact potential or established treaty rights, the Government of Canada must satisfy its duty to consult, and where appropriate, accommodate those rights.

Public Safety Canada will work collaboratively with the Indigenous partners throughout the development, management and review of regulations.

Honourable senators, in conclusion, this bill is supported by gun-control groups, women’s organizations and victims’ rights groups unequivocally. It is also supported by a large number of law enforcement agencies across the country, and it reflects, I think, many of the recommendations of the report of the Mass Casualty Commission.

I believe the freeze on handgun sales and transfer and a ban on military-style semi-automatic firearms are what the majority of Canadians want in this country. This has been reflected in many opinion polls over the years, including a recent poll commissioned by our colleague Senator Dasko that found high support for key measures of this bill. The poll found that 85% of Canadians support or somewhat support prohibiting new assault-style firearms from entering the Canadian market. On the controversial issue of handguns, 73% of Canadians support or somewhat support the freezing of the sale, purchase, transport and importation of handguns.

Colleagues, the safety of our communities must be paramount, and any plan to combat gun violence must be comprehensive and well-considered. This is not about taking firearms away from responsible owners, hunters or sport shooters. This is about taking a common-sense, responsible approach to tackling violent crime and preventing senseless, tragic deaths.

As I said at the start of my remarks, I view this bill through the lens of balancing the rights and safety of Canadians with the privilege of owning a gun to hunt, sport-shoot or collect. I believe — as did many of the witnesses who appeared, including the Deputy Chief Constable Wilson — that the bill does indeed strike a proper balance.

Senators, the tragic event 34 years ago started this country on a journey to ban assault-style weapons in our country and in our society. The bill before you is in part both honouring the memory of those 14 women and fighting for the legacy to complete that journey. It is also about fighting for a future that does not have to experience this tragedy ever again.

Catherine Bergeron, the sister of Geneviève Bergeron who died in the mass shooting, spoke to this last night at a tribute to victims of the Montreal massacre when she said the following:

It was a cold December night, a bit like tonight. And in the dusk of early winter, they left us. They left without wanting to. . . . And they left us a legacy that can be summed up in two words: Never again. Their loss can’t be in vain.

Senators, although those women died very tragically, we have it in our power to give them meaning by passing this bill. I urge you to support the bill before you without amendment and make that possible.

Thank you so much.

Hon. Mohamed-Iqbal Ravalia: Senator Yussuff, there’s a significant concern being expressed, given that we have advances in digital technology, of guns being printed by 3-D measures and other such options, particularly in the underworld. To what extent has your bill studied that concern?