Government Motion (28 November 2022)

From Hansard (28 November 2022)

 

Federal Firearms Legislation

The Assembly was debating the following motion moved by the Honourable Christine Tell, Minister of Corrections, Policing & Public Safety:

"That this House condemns and denounces the most recent attack on lawful firearms owners by the Liberal-NDP coalition federal government through amendments to Bill C-21, which the Chief Firearms Officer of Saskatchewan estimates will instantly criminalize approximately 75,000 Saskatchewan residents; and further,  

This House calls on the Government of Saskatchewan to explore all options to protect the rights of law-abiding firearms owners. "

---

Hon. Mr. McLeod: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I’d like to begin my remarks by reciting three quotes. Some have been recited already, but there’s a common theme that develops from the quotes and I’d like to preface my comments with that theme if I could, Mr. Speaker.

The first quote, of course, was Tyler Shandro, the Minister of Justice for Alberta, who . . . I will amend the quote accordingly. But it starts as follows, Mr. Speaker:

If these amendments are allowed to proceed, Bill C-21 will be the most sweeping and arbitrary ban of firearms in Canadian history. The federal Liberals claimed that they were never going after hunters, farmers, and target shooters . . . This is clearly part of a push to ban legal firearms ownership altogether.

The second quote, Mr. Deputy Speaker, reads as follows:

The rifles and shotguns that law-abiding Saskatchewan farmers, hunters, and sport shooters use will soon be confiscated by the Trudeau-NDP government. These men and women will be criminalized overnight. Saskatchewan will not stand idly by while the federal government yet again attacks law-abiding citizens instead of focusing on crime.

That of course, Mr. Deputy Speaker, was our very own Minister of Corrections, Policing and Public Safety.

And the final quote, Mr. Deputy Speaker, is from Kelvin Goertzen, Minister of Justice and Attorney General for Manitoba, where he stated, and I quote:

Manitoba continues to raise significant concerns regarding the proposed measures that will punish law-abiding firearms owners while doing little to address illegal importation of firearms from the United States. The federal government should focus its attention and resources on illegally imported firearms, and those who commit crime with guns, instead of measures that target law-abiding citizens. Manitoba’s government stands united with Saskatchewan and Alberta in opposing the federal Liberal government’s confiscation plans.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, the common theme that develops there is pretty simple, and that’s that the federal government is criminalizing and punishing law-abiding citizens and it is banning legally obtained property.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, I do not own a firearm. I am not a farmer or a rancher and I don’t hunt. But I don’t have to be a farmer or a hunter to understand and appreciate the severity of the negative impacts of Bill C-21 and the negative impacts that that bill will have on law-abiding citizens who are responsible firearms owners. Mr. Speaker, I might not be personally impacted by C-21; however when the federal government seeks to impose its ideological and misinformed will upon the people of Saskatchewan and across the nation without a logical or rationally defensible reason to do so, I am offended to my core.

Of course governments of all levels implement various policies and legislation that impacts our daily lives, but what is critical in that exercise, Mr. Deputy Speaker, is that they do so with carefully considered reasoning and logic.

With Bill C-21, we have a Liberal-NDP coalition government attempting to ban and confiscate firearms from tens of thousands of responsible, law-abiding Saskatchewan citizens. And their reason, Mr. Speaker? They suggest that doing so will somehow make our communities safer. To put it bluntly, that is a ridiculous and illogical proposition.

I’ve said it many times in this Chamber, Mr. Speaker, I enjoy a good debate. I enjoy rationalizing arguments and applying logical reason to look at all sides of any particular issue, not necessarily to fight about it but to examine it from various perspectives. Mr. Speaker, Bill C-21 and the amendments proposed by the federal government last week — without consultation, by the way — not only lacks logic but it also demonstrates a complete absence of common sense. It’s difficult to properly debate such an issue.

It’s easy for governments to say we want safer communities. Of course we do; we all do. Of course firearms safety is an important issue; no one is saying otherwise. The real question is, what steps and measures can be taken to actually make our communities safer? I believe Conservative Member of Parliament Glen Motz put it best when he said, “This [federal] government says, ‘We believe in making evidence-based decisions.’ Well, show us the evidence where licensed firearm owners are the problem.” The problem Mr. Motz is referring to is gun crimes.

Our government fully supports initiatives that will meaningfully reduce crime and make our communities safer. For example, initiatives that prevent and combat gang violence are supported by this government, Mr. Speaker. Initiatives addressing gun smuggling and illegally obtained firearms that actually create safer communities, well we fully support those. But Bill C-21 with its proposed amendments don’t accomplish these goals. In fact, quite the contrary.

Bill C-21 is a gross overreach of federal authority to confiscate the legally obtained property of law-abiding citizens. Let me say that again, Mr. Speaker. Bill C-21 is the gross overreach of federal authority to confiscate legally obtained property from law-abiding citizens. This NDP-supported federal government is creating a new law that instantly prohibits legally obtained property and suddenly makes those law-abiding citizens criminals. What’s particularly offensive is the fact that this Liberal-NDP coalition government attempts to justify their gross overreach by claiming that this new law is somehow making communities safer, Mr. Speaker. Really? How is that?

Our communities are not experiencing crime at the hands of responsible, law-abiding gun owners like our farmers, our ranchers, and our hunters. Yet that is precisely who is being targeted with Bill C-21. The proposed bill does nothing to achieve its stated goal, which is public safety. It’s nothing more than an ideological, virtue-signalling exercise by this federal government.

Sadly, this isn’t the first time we’ve seen this Liberal-NDP coalition government do something like this, Mr. Speaker. They’ve already demonstrated their willingness to reach beyond their constitutional jurisdiction to attack the citizens and businesses of Saskatchewan when they imposed the carbon tax under the guise of protecting the environment. And despite the fact that the carbon tax has demonstrated absolutely zero meaningful effect on the stated goal of reducing emissions, they continue charging it. And what’s worse, even drastic inflation, which drives up the cost of nearly everything we need day to day, isn’t stopping the federal Liberals from increasing that completely useless tax.

Mr. Speaker, federal Public Safety minister Marco Mendicino has accused those who oppose this bill as fearmongering. Mendicino is the same guy who stated that the federal government will be taking “into careful consideration” a number of factors when deciding what will constitute a prohibited firearm. Yet his list includes commonly used hunting rifles which are not prevalent in the commission of crime. So I struggle to accept his careful consideration will be of much use.

I suppose that’s why Mr. Mendicino was also quoted as saying, “We’re working very closely with the RCMP, we’re working very closely with provincial police services, local police services, to understand how best to make this work.”

Well maybe we in this House can be of assistance to Mr. Mendicino by sending him a clear message. Bill C-21 won’t work, Mr. Speaker, nor should it. Because, Mr. Speaker, you can’t improve public safety by turning law-abiding citizens into criminals. You don’t reduce crime and make communities safer by taking legally obtained firearms away from responsible hunters and farmers, just like you don’t protect the environment by taxing the people who are doing the best job at sustaining it. It’s that sort of upside-down and backwards thinking that this federal government has been operating with for far too long, Mr. Speaker. It’s illogical. It makes no sense.

And let’s not forget that those federal Liberals would not be able to impose and maintain their ineffective and senseless policies were it not for the support of the NDP. Now the members across the aisle have suddenly begun claiming that they don’t support the carbon tax. But where’s their policy on it, Mr. Speaker? Where’s their evidence that they’ve done anything to pressure their federal counterparts to stop supporting the Liberals on that issue?

Mr. Speaker, I’ve heard the members opposite use the term “word salad” several times in this session. I think that might be what they’re referring to when they use that phrase. They keep tossing out words, but there’s no substance behind the words. To borrow a fast food slogan, where’s the beef in their claims, Mr. Speaker?

They claim they support this motion just like they oppose the carbon tax. But what action have they done to actually demonstrate that? What steps have they taken, Mr. Speaker? The simple fact of the matter, these nonsensical Liberal policies and legislation cannot be imposed upon the citizens of our province if the NDP doesn’t support them. Yet here we are, Mr. Speaker, which can mean only one of two things: either those members’ voices are completely irrelevant within their own federal party, or they aren’t actually using their voices within their own party to stand up for the people of Saskatchewan.

Mr. Speaker, I’d like to believe that the opposition have at least some of degree of relevance within their own ranks, which suggests that the latter option is probably the more likely. So if the NDP members truly don’t support the carbon tax and actually oppose the amendments to Bill C-21, they will openly and immediately call upon their federal counterparts to stop these completely illogical laws that do nothing to meaningfully address their stated intent. And if they don’t do that, Mr. Speaker? Then I suppose we need to ask ourselves, is this just more word salad from an irrelevant opposition?

Mr. Speaker, I support the motion moved by the Minister of Corrections, Policing and Public Safety. Thank you.

---

Back to 2022/2023 Session