At the House of Commons Public Safety and National Security Committee Feb. 3, the Liberals received unanimous consent from the official Opposition Conservatives, NDP and Bloc Québécois committee members, to withdraw a Nov. 22, 2022, Liberal motion (G4) proposing government amendments to proposed Bill C-21 that would, among other things, have expanded the scope of the definition of “prohibited weapon.”
In the committee, the federal government also committed not to move ahead under Bill C-21 with its as-yet unintroduced, but controversial, motion G46 — amendments that would have added many guns to the list of banned weapons.
In Question Period Feb. 3, NDP MP Alistair MacGregor said Bill C-21 was originally intended to help Canadians feel safe and end handgun violence. “Instead the Liberals introduced amendments [at committee] at the 11th hour that would make it harder for Indigenous people, farmers and hunters to support their families and put food on their table,” and that would go against Indigenous treaty rights, according to the Assembly of First Nations.
MacGregor asked whether Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino would apologize “for the mess he made with his amendments?”
“We are committed, and promised Canadians that we would take action on gun violence,” replied Liberal MP Pam Damoff, the minister’s parliamentary secretary. “On those particular amendments I will acknowledge there was not enough consultation. There were not enough conversations with Indigenous peoples across the country, and that’s why we’re committed in our committee … to listening to the concerns, and to making sure that our legislation is one that will protect public safety and keep Canadians safe.”
Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino
Mendicino acknowledged “legitimate concerns raised” about the need for more consultation. “We hear those concerns loud and clear, regret the confusion this process has caused and are committed to a thoughtful and respectful conversation that is based on facts, not fear,” the former federal prosecutor said.
He noted that the Liberal government introduced in 2020 a national ban on assault-style firearms to prohibit military-style guns used in some of Canada’s worst mass shootings, and built on that in 2022 with a handgun freeze and Bill C-21.
“On both occasions, we committed to advancing a clear, standard definition of what constitutes an assault-style firearm — something that industry, advocates and the gun community have long called for — and made good on it through amendments G4 and G46,” he said. “We are now getting to work with our parliamentary colleagues to craft a clear solution that will keep assault-style weapons off our streets. “
Mendicino reiterated that “the government’s intent is to focus on AR-15s and other assault-style weapons — not guns commonly used for hunting.” Calling hunting a way of life for many and a “proud Canadian tradition,” he emphasized “Bill C-21 isn’t about targeting hunters, it’s about certain guns that are too dangerous in other contexts.”
Firearms advocates welcomed the withdrawal of the proposed measures but said their lobbying continues. While congratulating “our community and all those who put so much effort into pushing back against the Liberals and their disastrous amendments G4 and G46,” the Canadian Coalition for Firearms Rights (CCFR) said it “acknowledges there's still much work to do. The majority of provisions in Bill C-21 have no potential benefits to public safety, and still remain as a deterrent to legal and regulated firearm ownership in Canada.”
“The Liberals faced a massive public backlash over this from ordinary Canadians who saw this for what it was; the largest attack on hunters in Canadian history,” Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre said in a statement that accused the Liberal government of wanting to ban hunting rifles. “The only reason that the Liberals are withdrawing is because of strong Conservative leadership resisting this attack on farmers, hunters, and Indigenous people.”
For their part, gun control advocates accused the government of caving into rampant “misinformation” circulated about the “assault weapons amendments” that they had long pushed for.
“Survivors and victims of mass killings who have been campaigning for decades to ban assault weapons are shocked by the unanimous withdrawal of amendments G-4 and G-46 aimed at banning assault weapons by the Standing Committee on Public Safety,” Nathalie Provost, a survivor and spokesperson for PolySeSouvient, said in a statement.
“It is clear that the misinformation propagated by Conservative MPs and the gun lobby has won,” she said. “The only glimmer of hope lies in the possibility of reintroducing new amendments based on the additional consultations that have simultaneously been voted on, especially if these are conducted in a serious way in order to clarify the true impact of the proposed measures and to effectively counter the disinformation.”
The gun control group sparked by the 1989 mass murder of 14 women at École Polytechnique in Montreal pushed back on claims that the proposed ban on assault weapons would affect 17 hunting firearms in a new analysis posted on their website.
“One has to wonder why the CCFR is showcasing models whose classification would not change under Bill C-21, as they are either hunting calibres that are unaffected by the proposed changes, or military-grade that are already prohibited,” Heidi Rathjen, PolySeSouvient’s co-ordinator and a witness to the Polytechnique massacre, said. “Is it because they couldn’t find a single example of a legitimate hunting gun that would be newly banned by C-21? The goal does not seem to be to actually block measures that are in C-21, as the hunting gun prohibitions they claim to oppose are not part of the bill. Rather, it looks like the goal is to mislead and scare hunters into joining their movement, more like a fundraiser or a membership drive.”
Provost added in the statement, “we are especially eager to hear from opposition parties with respect to the next steps, especially the Bloc Québécois. The government needs only one opposition party to deliver on [the Liberals’] promise to ban assault weapons, and it would be unthinkable for the Bloc not to collaborate in this regard."
The Bloc Quebecois said in a statement (translated) “this withdrawal was necessary, but will necessarily have to be followed by a new proposal. We are reaching out, and our demand is clear: the government must do more to remove military-style assault weapons from our homes and streets, while respecting the rights of hunters. It must define what constitutes an assault weapon, rather than banning models on a case-by-case basis.”
If you have any information, story ideas or news tips for The Lawyer’s Daily, please contact Cristin Schmitz at Cristin.schmitz@lexisnexis.ca or call 613 820-2794.