The Liberals are Soft on Crime
Plus the federal government's response to my petition on vaccine passports, Saturday tour of a relief warehouse, and more
The Liberals are Soft on Crime
The horrific murder of 19 schoolchildren and four teachers in Uvalde, Texas, just a week after ten African Americans were also murdered in a racially motivated attack in Buffalo, shocked many in the United States and Canada. Conservatives condemn in the strongest possible terms these egregious acts of violence, some of which we have seen in Canada as well. We are just two years removed from the Nova Scotia attacks that claimed 22 lives, now the subject of an independent public inquiry to examine the incidents leading up to the tragic events. These terrible acts transcend politics, and policymakers must foster appropriate solutions to handle the problems of gun violence. However, C-21, proposed by the Liberal government, is not the way forward.
On May 31, the Prime Minister and the Cabinet proposed C-21, which would implement a ‘freeze’ on the purchase, sale, importation, and transfer of handguns in the country. In his words, he was implementing a ‘cap’ on handguns. Other measures include increasing the maximum penalty for gun smuggling and trafficking from 10 years to 14 years. The Liberal government tried and failed to do something with handguns in the last Parliament, proposing a bill by the same title that allowed municipalities the power to ban handguns, an idea that was later abandoned due to the patchwork it would create locally for those trying to obey the law. This newest take at a handgun ban raises plenty of questions right off the start. If handguns are a threat to public safety as the Liberal government says, why resort to a policy that maintains the overall numbers rather than reduce them? If there is no evidence of a problem with licensed firearm owners keeping handguns, what is the point of preventing their import, purchase, or sale? How does restricting the legal transfer of handguns in the country impact illegally obtained guns? These are the questions the Liberal government are unable to answer. Moreover, where is the action against border gun smuggling and what about the victims of violent gun crimes?
The problem is not with civilian ownership of firearms, it’s about the crimes committed with guns. Since the Liberals were elected in 2015, gun crime has gone up steadily each year, despite the bans they have instituted. Statistics Canada reported that from 2009 to 2019 criminal use of firearms increased 81 per cent. The legislation, at its core, does not adequately address these problems, instead trying to fix problems where they don’t exist. Top law enforcement officials in Canada have voiced similar objections. The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police do not support a handgun ban. Their leader, Vancouver police chief Adam Palmer, stated Canada already has strong firearms regulations and in most cases of gun violence, the handguns used were obtained illegally. Many of these guns, he noted, were smuggled illegally from the United States. Alberta’s chief firearms officer, Teri Bryant, says the new law will target law-abiding firearms owners, directly contradicting the federal government’s stated objective. In testimony before the public safety committee in February this year, Toronto Police deputy chief Myron Demkiw said 86% of gun crimes that investigators were able to trace were committed with guns smuggled from the United States, a trend that has been increasing since 2019.
To counter this, Bill C-21 increases the maximum penalty for gun smuggling and trafficking from 10 years to 14 years. This is good, but Bill C-5, a soft-on-crime law proposed by this government, is removing mandatory minimum sentences for 13 firearm offences, such as weapons trafficking, possession of prohibited or restricted firearms, importing or exporting unauthorized weapons knowingly, discharging of a firearm, robbery with a firearm, and more. Currently, importing a gun illegally carries a mandatory minimum of three years on the first offence and five years minimum on the second offence. Bill C-5 scraps this. If the Liberal government truly cared about clamping down on gun crime, these mandatory minimums would not be removed at all. Instead, the measures target law-abiding firearms owners far more than it currently targets gun criminals. Criminals committing these offences could serve house arrest because C-5 also expands the option for a judge to order house arrest instead of prison for crimes such as sexual assault, assault causing bodily harm or with a weapon, assaulting a police officer with a weapon, motor vehicle theft, abduction of a person under 14, and other offences.
Furthermore, the Liberal government’s efforts on gun control measures ignore the findings of consultations they themselves launched. In 2018, Public Safety Canada launched an engagement process to get public insight on policy, regulations and legislation to reduce violent crime involving firearms. They received 1,200 submissions from stakeholders and over 134,000 completed questionnaires from everyday Canadians. The findings of the report were as follows: many participants felt strongly that bans on firearms targeted law-abiding owners, rather than illicit firearms, and these measures would have no major impact on crime reduction and gang violence. Of the 1,200 submissions, 64% were opposed to new limits. Of the 134,000 questionnaire responses, 81% of respondents did not want more to be done to limit access to handguns. 66% of these respondents did not even own firearms themselves. The majority of respondents and invited stakeholders proposed solutions Conservatives have pushed for, such as enhanced enforcement capacity for law enforcement and border officials, along with harsher punishments for firearms trafficking and gun crime. What this shows is the federal government does not understand the nuances of responsible firearms ownership policy and controlling our borders properly to reduce gun smuggling.
The federal government needs to focus on victims of violent crimes committed with firearms. Next, they need to look at enhancing enforcement by police services. In the case of the Nova Scotia attacks, the perpetrator had illegally owned firearms, which the RCMP was aware of, and 3 of the 4 weapons used in the mass shooting came from the United States. Finally, the international border we share with the United States needs to have a beefed up presence of border security explicitly dedicated to ending the lucrative gun smuggling that is happening right now. We can do better than C-21 and Conservatives will be working hard to ensure Canadians understand these points.
Petition on abolishing domestic vaccine passport is responded to by Minister of Transport
Recently, I sponsored a petition from a constituent’s family member calling upon the Minister of Transport to abolish the domestic vaccine passport requirement for Canadian citizens and permanent residents taking domestic flights. The petition received over 18,000 signatures, highlighting its popularity among Canadians. The Minister responded to the petition this past week, offering no timelines on removing restrictions because “the pandemic is not over.” It seems that the only government that does not recognize that restrictions should be removed is the federal Liberal government. All ten provinces have lifted nearly all restrictions and our allies in the European Union and the United States have followed suit. Yet, travellers arriving in Canada are still being subjected to random COVID-19 testing and must answer personal public-health questions on the ArriveCan app. Airports are full, stadiums are at capacity, shopping malls have returned to normal, but the air and rail travel restrictions remain with no proper scientific justification offered by the Liberal government. It is time to return to a pre-pandemic life. Conservatives have had three votes in Parliament to end the restrictions on February 14, March 24 and May 30, all of which were voted down by the Liberal government.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner investigating Minister Ng for ‘sweetheart’ contract
Last week, the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner announced that they have opened an investigation into a $17,000 contract that was awarded to a friend of Minister Ng by the Minister’s department. This contract was issued less than one month after the country began the first COVID-19 lockdown. At a time when many Canadians were without a source of income, and many small businesses were struggling, one well-connected Liberal was thrown a nearly $17,000 contract by her close pal inside the Prime Minister’s Cabinet. This is just one more instance where the Liberal government continues to favour its close friends and make a mockery of the ethical laws the government has to abide by.
Saturday tour of a relief warehouse for Ukraine
This past weekend, I visited with MP Kelly McCauley an incredible all-civilian operation to bring needed supplies to Ukraine including hospital beds, medic kits, diapers, covers, oxygen tanks, firefighting equipment and so much more. They've been sending it so far by container and occasionally by air transport. But the latest supplies need to get there faster and are asking for help with plane from Edmonton to Poland or Romania. I will be pressing the federal government to note the remarkable efforts by these Canadians and to offer resources to get these items to Ukraine as soon as possible.
Voting to Return to pre-Pandemic Normal
I began the week by voting in favour of the conservative motion to immediately revert to pre-pandemic rules and service levels for travel. One Liberal MP and one Independent MP voted with the Conservatives but unfortunately, that motion failed with the Liberals and NDP voting against it. This is the third vote Conservatives have forced on ending the federal vaccine mandate and pandemic restrictions which the Liberal government has refused to support.
Yeas: 117 ✅
Nays: 202 ❌