Skip to main content
Start of content;

CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION

1. THE MANDATE OF THE SUB-COMMITTEE

Canadian firearm laws were extensively reorganized by Bill C-68, given Royal Assent on 5 December 1995 (now S.C. 1995, c. 39), and which created a new Firearms Act containing regulatory provisions. Criminal penalties remain in the amended Part III of the Criminal Code dealing with firearms and other weapons. Although the bill was controversial, its objective was not. As with past amendments to firearms legislation, Bill C-68 was designed to strengthen the system of controls in the interest of public safety, while at the same time ensuring that the interests of individuals and businesses using firearms legitimately and responsibly were dealt with fairly, and that their activities were not unduly hampered.

The Firearms Act contains many new or expanded regulation-making powers the exercise of which will establish critical elements of the gun control regime. Because of the significance of regulations made pursuant to firearms legislation, and their application to the activities of Canadians, a somewhat unusual process of parliamentary review was added to this legislation by Bill C-17 (S.C. 1991, c. 40).

Although the Standing Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of Regulations is mandated to examine all regulations after they have been made, in the case of any new firearms regulations Parliament was given the authority and responsibility to review the proposed content of the regulations before they can be made. Pursuant to section 118 of the Firearms Act, the Minister of Justice is required to have the proposed regulations laid before each House of Parliament for consideration. The appropriate committee of each House is given a mandate to conduct enquiries and public hearings, and report its findings.

On 27 November 1996, the Minister of Justice tabled 11 sets of draft regulations in Parliament. All would be made pursuant to the enabling powers of section 117 of the Firearms Act. Pursuant to Standing Order 35(2) of the House of Commons, these draft regulations were referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs for examination. A Sub-Committee was established, pursuant to Standing Order 108(1)(a) and (b) on 19 September 1996, in order to conduct this examination.

2. THE EXAMINATION OF THE DRAFT REGULATIONS

The opportunity and the challenge afforded by a parliamentary review of the draft regulations was welcomed by Members of the Sub-Committee. Because of the importance of these draft regulations, a comprehensive study was conducted. The Sub-Committee heard 79 witnesses representing 53 groups at hearings held between27 January to 6 February 1997, and also received written submissions from many more.

Following careful consideration of all of the views and submissions that were received, the recommendations in this report represent the Sub-Committee's conclusions as to the additions and changes to the draft regulations considered necessary to make them as fair and effective as possible.

CHAPTER 2 - GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS

1. COMMUNICATION PROGRAMS

Many of the witnesses appearing before the Sub-Committee expressed the view that communication programs were essential to the proper implementation of the firearms control legislation. Because this legislation will apply to many people who are pursuing legitimate activities, extensive communication programs will be required to advise them of the contents of the regulations and the implications for their activities. It is imperative that those who must comply with the regulations have knowledge of the requirements of the legislation. While these communication programs should be directed at firearms owners in particular, it is also important that all Canadians become aware of the requirements of these regulations.

Without adequate communication programs, there is a risk that many of the requirements in the firearms control legislation will continue to be misunderstood or ignored. Furthermore, adequate communication programs regarding the requirements of the legislation are also essential to reduce inadvertent violations.

These communication programs should not be limited to written materials but should also include the use of video presentations and other effective means of communication in order to ensure that the messages being communicated reach as many people as possible.

While it is important to have general communication programs that inform the public at large of their responsibilities under the legislation, it would also be very beneficial if programs were directed at particular users, for example, museums, target-shooters, outfitters, hunters and businesses supplying firearms to the motion picture and television industry. These programs should set out the requirements that are specific to each such group, to ensure a better understanding of their obligations. These specific programs should also be used to address any misapprehensions that some groups may have in relation to the legislation.

It is also important that communication programs provide information to non-residents with respect to border-crossing requirements and in relation to their general obligations under Canadian firearms legislation. This should be done directly, for example through foreign hunting magazines, and indirectly, through Canadian outfitters and other groups that serve foreign clients.

The Sub-Committee is of the view that the government should also conduct extensive advertising in the media in order to advise firearms owners of the implementation date of the new regulatory regime. In addition, owners should be advised on where they can obtain further information regarding this regime. This should be done well in advance of implementation to allow firearms owners time to prepare accordingly.

Finally, the Department of Justice should prepare comprehensive training materials for those who will be responsible for the administration of the legislation. This will help to ensure a more uniform application of the legislation across the country. The Sub-Committee also believes that the training materials should place emphasis on the issue of spousal abuse.

2. USER-FRIENDLY MATERIALS

Because regulations by their nature are complex and not meant to serve as interpretation guides, materials should be made available in plain language, setting out the requirements of the legislation. These guides would be of assistance not only to firearms owners but also those responsible for the administration of the legislation. Particular emphasis is placed on this recommendation.

In addition to materials setting the requirements in plain language, the Department of Justice should prepare an office consolidation of the regulations which would contain a table of contents and an index for ease of use. This would make the regulations more user friendly in cases where it is necessary to review the precise legal text of the regulations. These office consolidations should be made readily available to members of the general public.

CHAPTER 3 - FIREARMS LICENCES REGULATIONS

1. NON-RESIDENTS SIXTY-DAY POSSESSION LICENCES (BORROWED FIREARMS)

Clause 10 of these regulations would set out the purposes for which a non-resident would be eligible to hold a non-resident sixty-day possession licence to borrow non-restricted firearms. Some of the witnesses raised concerns that the purposes that were listed in the draft regulations were too narrow. In order to rectify this problem, the Sub-Committee agrees that two new purposes should be added.

The first involves the participation in "parades and pageants". These terms are of a general nature and would be intended to cover military and semi-military parades and other similar legitimate events. The Sub-Committee leaves it to the Department of Justice to find more specific terms if this is deemed necessary.

The second deals with the borrowing of a non-restricted firearm for use in motion picture, television, video or theatrical productions or publishing activities. This would allow non-residents to borrow non-restricted firearms for use in a production in Canada.

2. SPOUSAL NOTIFICATION FOR ACQUISITION LICENCES FOR CROSS-BOWS

Clause 3 of the regulations will require the chief firearms officer to notify each current or former spouse or common-law partner that an application for a possession and acquisition licence for firearms has been made. The purpose of this notice is to allow the spouse or common-law partner to raise any concerns they might have with respect to this application. However, it does not require spousal consent.

The Sub-Committee notes that this same requirement is not found in the clauses dealing with an application for an acquisition licence for cross-bows. It is our belief that the spousal notification requirement should also be included as part of the process to obtain an acquisition licence for cross-bows.

3. PRESCRIBED PURPOSES FOR BUSINESSES TO BE ELIGIBLE TO POSSESS SPECIFIED PROHIBITED ITEMS

Subsection 11(2) of the Firearms Act would provide that businesses can only possess prohibited items if the purpose for possession is a prescribed purpose set out in the regulations. Clause 21 of these draft regulations set out those prescribed purposes.

Witnesses were concerned that not all of their business activities were covered under Clause 21. For example, one of the witnesses wondered whether the proposed prescribed purposes covered their activities dealing with training ammunition and training weapons. Another witness was concerned that the manufacture of prohibited items without an export permit, as required by paragraph 21(k) of the draft regulations, was also not covered by the prescribed purposes.

The Sub-Committee does not have the expertise to determine what are appropriate prescribed purposes with respect to Clause 21. It is extremely important, however, that all business activities for which a business legitimately needs to be in possession of a prohibited item be covered by one of the prescribed purposes in these regulations.

4. BUSINESS CONDITIONS

Clause 23 of these regulations set out a series of conditions that are to be attached to a business licence. Some of the witnesses raised concerns about certain conditions and suggested various amendments to the Sub-Committee.

The first concern raised was with respect to the condition at paragraph 23(1)(a) of the draft regulations which provides that a business is not to depict or promote violence in an advertisement of a firearm or other weapon. Some of the businesses that are involved in supplying firearms to the motion picture and television industry were concerned that this condition might apply to them and that it was impossible for them to ensure that a firearm would not depict or promote violence. The Sub-Committee agrees that this paragraph should be clarified in order that it is understood that it is not directed at advertisements such as those for movies or other forms of entertainment in which firearms are only indirectly involved.

The second area of concern dealt with paragraphs 23(1)(c) and (d) which requires that businesses keep records of transactions entered into, in relation to firearms, and requires them to keep an inventory of specified items which are present at the location of the business. While the Sub-Committee recognizes that these conditions are appropriate for most businesses, it believes that they should not apply to carriers, since they are not conducting the same kinds of activities as other businesses and their possession of firearms is generally for short periods of time.

Finally, there was some concern that paragraph 23(1)(d), requiring businesses to keep an inventory of specified items present at the location of the business, would necessitate maintaining a running inventory. The Sub-Committee believes that paragraph 23(1)(d) should be clarified to make clear that an inventory by all businesses would only be conducted, and the information remitted to the chief firearms officer, once a year pursuant to this paragraph. The legislation would authorize the chief firearms officer to require more frequent monitoring, in individual cases, if it is appropriate.

CHAPTER 4 - NON-PROHIBITED AMMUNITION TRANSFER DOCUMENT REGULATIONS

The Sub-Committee believes that amendments to these regulations are not required. The Sub-Committee does note, however, that there appeared to be significant misunderstanding as to the intent of this regulation and wishes to provide some explanation. These regulations do not set out any requirement with respect to the transfer of non-prohibited ammunition. All of the requirements regarding such transfers are found at section 25 of the Firearms Act which provides that, in order to transfer ammunition, the person receiving the ammunition must either hold a licence under the Act, or, until1 January 2001, a prescribed document. These regulations would set out what would be an acceptable prescribed document.

Therefore, Canadian firearms owners who have not obtained a licence before1 January 2001, (during the transitional period) will need a prescribed document in lieu of a licence. Non-residents, meanwhile, will either obtain a non-resident sixty-day possession licence to borrow a firearm or will import their own firearms and would have a deemed licence pursuant to section 36 of the Act. In such cases, they would not need any other document and they could receive or purchase ammunition while in Canada.

The important point is that everyone on a range will be required to have a licence to possess the firearms they are using, except for present Canadian firearms owners during the transitional period. Once these facts are established, nothing more would be needed to transfer ammunition between competitors.

The Sub-Committee would like to point out that this is a perfect example of the type of misunderstanding that should be clarified in the communication programs that we recommend in Chapter 2 of this report.

CHAPTER 5 - STORAGE, DISPLAY, TRANSPORTATION AND HANDLING OF FIREARMS BY INDIVIDUALS REGULATIONS

1. APPLICATION

Subclause 2(3) of these regulations sets out a series of activities in the course of which certain clauses of the draft regulations would not apply. However, some of the witnesses were concerned that not all legitimate activities were covered. One activity that the Sub-Committee believes should be added is the use or handling of a firearm in the course of participating in a "parade or pageant". The same concerns that were raised in Chapter 3 of this report with respect to the use of these general terms would apply.

2. STORAGE OF FIREARMS APART FROM AMMUNITION

Some of the witnesses were concerned that ammunition could not be stored in the same container or receptacle, or in the same vault, safe or room, as the firearm. It is the Sub-Committee's understanding that the intent of Clauses 3, 4 and 5 was to allow the storage in the same container or receptacle, or in the same vault, safe or room and the Sub-Committee believes that these clauses should be clarified so that the intended requirement becomes apparent.

3. THE REQUIREMENT TO REMOVE THE BOLT OR BOLT-CARRIER FROM AUTOMATIC FIREARMS

Some of the provisions in the regulations require the individual who has a prohibited automatic firearm that has a removable bolt or bolt-carrier, to remove the bolt or bolt-carrier for the purposes of storage, display and transportation. There was some concern that this was an onerous requirement for individuals, who unlike the operators of businesses may not have the required knowledge to remove the bolt or bolt-carrier of certain types of firearms. The Sub-Committee agrees that the regulations should be amended to require the removal of the bolt or bolt-carrier only when this piece is removable "with reasonable facility".

Because of the other requirements of the regulations and the limited number of such firearms, the Sub-Committee does not feel that public safety would be compromised by such a measure.

4. TRANSPORTATION OF FIREARMS IN NON-LOCKABLE VEHICLES

The Sub-Committee notes that the draft regulations as they are presently written would prevent firearms from ever being left unattended in a vehicle that was not lockable. Obviously, this could cause problems with respect to the transportation of firearms in non-lockable vehicles such as snowmobiles or canoes. Many vehicles used for hunting do not have a lockable trunk and are themselves not lockable as is required by the draft regulations.

The Sub-Committee believes that some limited provision should be made to allow firearms to be left unattended in vehicles that are not lockable. Because of the concerns for public safety, it is suggested that this be allowed only in remote wilderness areas. The specifics regarding the requirements in relation to the transportation is left to be determined by the Department of Justice.

CHAPTER 6 - STORAGE, DISPLAY AND TRANSPORTATION OF FIREARMS AND OTHER WEAPONS BY BUSINESSES REGULATIONS

1. ALTERNATIVE STANDARD IN RELATION TO MUSEUMS

The museum groups appearing before the Sub-Committee requested that they be allowed to display firearms in period rooms or dioramas. They suggested standards that could be applied in such cases. They were concerned that the alternative standard provided for in the draft regulations, which allows museums to display firearms under security measures that are equal or superior to those provided for other businesses, if this is approved in writing by the chief firearms officer, would be too cumbersome for the museums and the chief firearms officers.

The Sub-Committee is sympathetic to the concerns of museums but believes that the alternative standard provision sufficiently addresses their concerns about the appropriate display of firearms in museum settings. However, the Sub-Committee does recommend adequate flexibility in the administration of this alternative standard. The chief firearms officers should be urged to apply this alternative standard as liberally as possible. This would ensure that firearms will be displayed in museums in a manner which is faithful to their setting.

2. MARKINGS ON CONTAINERS

The transportation provisions in these regulations provide that, with certain exceptions, containers are not to have any markings on their exteriors that would indicate that a weapon, prohibited device or ammunition is in it. This is to reduce the chances of others finding out what is in the container.

The Authorization to Export or Import Firearms Regulations (Businesses), meanwhile, provide that a condition is to be attached to the authorization to export and the authorization to import that requires a business that is exporting or importing goods described in section 43 of the Firearms Act to identify such goods by marking certain specified information in a machine-readable form (bar codings) on the outer package of the goods. Some of the witnesses were concerned that by fulfilling this requirement, they would contravene the requirements stated in the Storage, Display and Transportation of Firearms and Other Weapons by Businesses Regulations. This was not the intent of the provisions in the export and import regulations since they required only a machine-readable marking which would not conflict with the prohibition in the general transportation requirements. Clearly the drafting needs to be amended so that the intended result becomes apparent.

3. REPORTING REQUIREMENT IN the MOVIE INDUSTRY

Paragraphs 11(1)(g) and 12(1)(e) require that, where prohibited firearms (other than prohibited handguns), restricted weapons, prohibited weapons, prohibited devices and prohibited ammunition are transported by a business licensed to supply the firearm for motion picture, video, television or theatrical productions, the business must report the location of the firearm to the chief firearms officer immediately after it is moved from one location to another.

Some businesses involved in this industry expressed concern that the term location was not adequately defined. They stated that locations can be temporary and that there can be multiple locations in one day. As an example, they were not sure whether moving from one city block to another would be considered a new location and, therefore, require them to report this fact to the chief firearms officer.

The Sub-Committee agrees with their concerns and feels that it must be clearly stated when the reporting requirement applies. The Sub-Committee suggests that the requirement to report a new location to the chief firearms officer should apply only if the items are moved to a new municipality. Therefore, notification would not be necessary if the new location is within the same municipal area.

4. TRANSPORTATION OF PROHIBITED ITEMS

Paragraphs 12(1)(c) and (d) of the regulations require that, when transporting restricted weapons, prohibited weapons, prohibited devices or prohibited ammunition, any employee accompanying a shipment must be able to communicate at all times during transportation by means of some communication device and the business must keep a strict set of records with respect to the goods being shipped, the route taken by the vehicle, the names of the employees transporting the goods and the names and addresses of any warehouse where the goods are temporarily stored while being transported.

Some of the witnesses representing businesses that possessed such items, which include replicas and large-capacity magazines, were concerned that these two requirements could be unduly burdensome in cases where they intended to transport their own goods. For example, businesses involved in the motion picture and theatrical industry were of the view that the transportation provisions would be excessive, if applied to replica firearms, which are classified as prohibited devices.

The Sub-Committee shares these concerns and suggests that this clause be amended to make clear that the requirements provided in paragraphs 12(1)(c) and (d) of the regulations apply only to carriers and not to other businesses that are eligible to possess such items.

CHAPTER 7 - AUTHORIZATIONS TO TRANSPORT RESTRICTED FIREARMS AND PROHIBITED FIREARMS REGULATIONS

1. AUTHORIZATIONS TO TRANSPORT FOR SPECIFIC EVENTS

Subclause 3(2) of the regulations would provide that an authorization to transport could specify the periods for which transportation of the firearms is authorized in relation to a specific event for target practice or a specific target shooting competition.

This subclause has occasioned target-shooters much concern because it was thought to be too restrictive in respect of transportation to specific events. The Sub-Committee suggests that it be deleted from the draft regulations. However, pursuant to the Firearms Act and subclause 3(1) of the regulations, all authorizations to transport will still have a term.

2. THE DIRECT ROUTE CONDITION

The draft regulations provide that a chief firearms officer who issues an authorization to transport must attach to it the condition that the firearm be transported by a direct route between the places specified in the authorization. Many of the witnesses were concerned about the possible implication of this condition. For example, some wondered whether precise routes would have to be indicated on the authorization. They were worried that they would be in contravention of the authorization if their specified route was not accessible for various reasons.

It is the Sub-Committee's understanding that this condition was not intended to require transportation by specified routes. Because of the many concerns raised in relation to this matter, the Sub-Committee believes that Clause 4 should be amended to make clear that individuals need only transport by a route that "in all of the circumstances, was reasonably direct". The Sub-Committee expects that this condition will be administered with flexibility and common sense.

CHAPTER 8 - AUTHORIZATION TO EXPORT OR IMPORT FIREARMS REGULATIONS (BUSINESSES)

1. THE TIMING WITH RESPECT TO PROVIDING INFORMATION

The regulations stipulate the information that must be provided to the Registrar when a business applies for an authorization to export or import. There were concerns expressed with respect to the time that some of this information was to be provided to the Registrar. The first concern involved the naming of the carrier at the time of the application pursuant to paragraphs 3(1)(j) and 7(1)(j) of these regulations. Witnesses stated that this information might not be available at the time the application was made. The Sub-Committee shares this concern and suggests that businesses be permitted to supply the name of the carrier at a later time before the crossing of the border, if this information is not known when the authorization to import or export is applied for.

A second concern dealt with the requirement to indicate whether the goods being exported would be imported back into Canada, pursuant to paragraph 3(1)(k) of these regulations. Witnesses stated that it was often impossible for them to predict, at the time the application was made, whether or not these goods might return to Canada at some future date. The Sub-Committee, therefore, suggests that this requirement be amended to make clear that the requirement to advise the Registrar whether exported goods would be re-imported at a later date applies only if this is known or planned when the authorization to import or export is applied for.

A third concern involved the requirement to advise the Registrar whether there would be any stopovers when goods were imported, pursuant to paragraph 7(1)(d). Witnesses stated that it was impossible for them to predict all such stopovers. The Sub-Committee, therefore, suggests amendments to make clear that the requirement to advise the Registrar of the name and address of any place in Canada in which the goods will stopover applies only if this is known or planned when the authorization to import is applied for.

CHAPTER 9 - FIREARMS RECORDS REGULATIONS

1. APPLICATION OF PRIVACY LAW

The Privacy Commissioner raised concerns over ensuring adequate privacy protection for information collected under the Firearms Act as it is a federal statute administered by the provinces. For example, some provinces and territories do not have their own privacy legislation and among those provinces that do, some areas that are covered by the federal legislation are not covered by the provincial legislation.

To ensure that there is adequate privacy protection for information gathered under the Firearms Act, the Sub-Committee believes that it is important that negotiations be undertaken with the provinces and territory to establish Memoranda of Understanding to set out with certainty the applicability of federal and provincial privacy legislation.

2. MEDIATION INVOLVING INFORMATION AND PRIVACY MATTERS

Certain of the witnesses were concerned about information and privacy issues. They were worried that decisions may be made based on inaccurate or false information. In such cases, a reference to a provincial court judge would be the only remedy and the information would then become public. It was suggested that a formal intermediate legal process be established that would bind the chief firearms officers.

The Sub-Committee is not convinced that the legislation contains sufficient powers to create such a process. We also believe that the costs would be prohibitive. The Sub-Committee does suggest, however, that mechanisms to facilitate mediation of matters involving information and privacy be established on an administrative basis.

Section 72 of the Firearms Act requires that reasons must be included with a notice of refusal or revocation of a licence, disclosing the nature of the information relied on in making the decision. This could form the basis of a mediation mechanism which could be made available before matters end up before the courts. If the applicant is able to convince the chief firearms officer that the decision was based on inaccurate or false information, this should remove the need to refer the matter to a provincial court judge and thus reduce the chances of the information becoming public.

CHAPTER 10 - ABORIGINAL PEOPLES OF CANADA ADAPTATIONS REGULATIONS (FIREARMS)

1. ONGOING CONSULTATIONS

Most of the aboriginal witnesses raised serious concerns in relation to the implementation of this legislation in their communities. In fact, many of the witnesses questioned the constitutional validity of such legislation as it applied to their peoples. The following was stated by Ovide Mercredi, National Chief, Assembly of First Nations:

In summary, the position of the Assembly of First Nations with respect to the licensing, registration and related requirements for rifles and shotgun issues remains the same. We believe that they are unconstitutional because they unjustifiably infringe upon the constitutionally protected aboriginal and treaty rights for First Nations.
Aboriginal witnesses advanced a number of arguments concerning the application of the legislation to their communities. Several took the position that there had not been proper consultations with aboriginal groups, and that the legislation therefore failed to meet the test laid out in the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Sparrow. Many also asserted that Aboriginal people should not have to pay fees for licences and registration certificates. They also maintained that the Aboriginal Peoples of Canada Adaptations Regulations (Firearms) did not go far enough, and that Aboriginal communities should be given the power to administer the regulatory system. Some groups asserted that they have the power to enact their own firearms legislation which would supersede this legislation.

The Sub-Committee would like to make it clear that constitutional questions are entirely beyond the scope of this study. The concerns expressed raise serious and very complex legal issues which cannot be dealt with adequately in this report. However, recommendations have been included in this report, which the Sub-Committee hopes will help in finding acceptable solutions to aboriginal concerns.

Clearly, the issues will not be easily resolved. What is apparent to us is that it is crucial that the lines of communication remain open and that discussions be vigorously pursued. This would help ensure that aboriginal and treaty rights are respected and, with co-operation, that the legislation can be implemented in aboriginal communities.

2. COMMUNITY ADMINISTRATION

The Minister of Justice has made a commitment to develop community administration of the firearms control program where possible in aboriginal communities. The Sub-Committee strongly endorses this approach, and is of the view that this would go a long way toward meeting many of the concerns advanced by aboriginal witnesses. This could involve the appointment of firearms officers in those communities, and a variety of other means through which the communities could participate in the administration of the program.

The Sub-Committee also believes that it is essential that administrative steps be taken to help in the implementation of the legislation in aboriginal communities.

CHAPTER 11 - FIREARMS FEES REGULATIONS

1. FEES IN RELATION TO IMPORTATION BY A NON-RESIDENT WITHOUT A LICENCE

Sections 35 and 36 set out the process by which a non-resident can import his or her firearm into Canada. The non-resident will have to declare the firearm in the prescribed manner and a customs official would then confirm this declaration. A confirmed declaration would be deemed to be a licence authorizing the non-resident to possess that firearm and also a registration certificate for the firearm, for a period of 60 days.

The regulations set out the fee to be paid for a confirmation under subsection 35(1) of the Firearms Act. The draft regulations would set this fee at $50 and, as stated, this declaration would be valid for 60 days. The regulations would provide for one free renewal if this was done in accordance with the legislation.

Many witnesses, particularly witnesses representing outfitters, were concerned that the $50 fee would discourage non-residents from coming to Canada. They were worried about the implications this would have on commercial hunting and other related industries. The major concern appeared to be that this fee would have to be paid more than once a year if the non-resident returns later in the year.

The Sub-Committee is very concerned about non-resident fees and does not want the implementation of this fee to impede legitimate hunting businesses and other related industries. Thus, the Sub-Committee strongly urges that this fee be made payable only once a year, in order to address the concerns that the witnesses expressed. In support of the argument that the fee should be waived for future confirmations in the same year, the Sub-Committee notes that the costs for processing subsequent declarations in the same year would be substantially lower since most of the processing would have been done during the first declaration.

A last point the Sub-Committee would like to make is with respect to the number of firearms that a non-resident will be able to import with a confirmation. Many of the witnesses were concerned that the fee to be paid would cover only one firearm. This is not the case. The Sub-Committee believes that future regulations dealing with importation by individuals should clarify that a confirmation could cover more than one firearm.

2. FEES FOR BUSINESS LICENCES

Some of the witnesses who appeared before the Sub-Committee raised some questions concerning business fees. There were concerns that the fee for a business licence dealing with the manufacture or assembly of non-firearms (Business Activity 6(b) in Schedule II) would be inappropriately high for small manufacturing businesses. One example mentioned was that of a small local business that manufactures replicas for local theatre troups. Since these businesses are not dealing with firearms, the Sub-Committee agrees that a substantial reduction in this fee would be in order.

The business licence fees include the fees payable for supplying firearms to the motion picture, video or television industry. There would only be one fee to cover all of the different businesses which could be involved in this industry. The prohibited items for which a business licence would be required range from replica firearms to what have been referred to as `weapons of mass destruction'. Some businesses will possess all or most of the prohibited items; others will limit their activities to only one or two types of prohibited items, such as replica firearms and short-barrelled handguns. Because entertainment businesses will vary widely in the items they possess, the Sub-Committee agrees that it is appropriate to set out different classes of fees. This would lower the costs of operating such a licensed business.

3. FEES FOR REPLACEMENT DOCUMENTS

It was brought to the Sub-Committee's attention that Clause 15 of the regulations would require the payment of a $25 fee for a replacement document even though the fee for this document can be less in some cases. For example, sustenance hunters can obtain a licence for free and the basic fee for a minor's licence is only $10. The Sub-Committee does not believe that it is justifiable to charge a higher fee for a replacement document than that charged for the document itself. The fee should be the lesser of the applicable fee for this document, at the time the replacement document is requested, or $25.

4. FEES FOR AUTHORIZATIONS TO IMPORT AND EXPORT

The draft regulations would set the fees for authorizations to import and export at $20 per authorization. While this does not appear to be a large amount, the fees paid by some businesses in a year could be significant. For example, a Canadian manufacturer who until now shipped their goods to a central warehouse belonging to one of their clients in the United States has been informed that there is a possibility that they will now have to ship their goods directly to the more than 2,000 individuals stores. It is obvious, in this case, that the $20 fee multiplied by the number of shipments would have a significant impact. As was explained to the Sub-Committee, the margin between competitors is very small and the cumulative effect of these fees could have a negative impact on manufacturers who export to other countries.

The Sub-Committee is very concerned about the potential impact and suggests that a bulk rate or a yearly maximum for authorizations to export or import should be available that would limit the impact on major exporters and importers.

CHAPTER 12 - ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS

Although the Sub-Committee's mandate was solely to review and recommend changes to the draft regulations before it, the Sub-Committee feels compelled to make certain recommendations which are not covered by this specific set of draft regulations.

1. REPRODUCTIONS OF ANTIQUES

One of the concerns brought to Sub-Committee's attention involves the way that reproduction antiques will be classified under the Criminal Code. Subsection 84(1) of the Criminal Code will define antique firearms as any firearm manufactured before 1898 that was not designed to discharge rim-fire or centre-fire ammunition and that has not been redesigned to discharge such ammunition, or, any firearm that is prescribed to be an antique firearm. The significance of this classification is that, under subsection 84(3), antique firearms will be exempt from the regulatory provisions of the Firearms Act, except for the storage, display, transportation and handling requirements of paragraph 117(h) of the Firearms Act. However, under the proposed classification, reproductions of antiques would not be exempt under the legislation.

A witness representing re-enactors expressed the view that this classification could put an end to re-enactments in Canada and all of the monetary benefits that flow from these events. The Sub-Committee believes strongly that since these reproductions do not pose more of a safety concern than the original antique, they should be provided the same exemption under the legislation. Therefore, the Sub-Committee suggests that the government utilize its power pursuant to paragraph 84(1)(b) to prescribe reproductions of antiques, such as flint-locks, match-locks and wheel-locks. It was acknowledged by the witness that in nearly all cases, this would cover the reproductions used by re-enactors.

2. ADDITONAL PROVISIONS FOR THE MOVIE INDUSTRY

Replica firearms will be classified as prohibited devices under the Criminal Code. In addition, short-barrelled or small-calibre handguns will be classified as prohibited firearms. Although these classifications are justifiable, they will have consequences on the theatrical, film and television industry.

Subject to certain exceptions, only licensed businesses will be allowed to possess prohibited firearms, prohibited weapons, prohibited devices or prohibited ammunition, for a prescribed purpose. One of the prescribed purposes involves use in respect of motion picture, television, video or theatrical productions or in publishing activities.

Because of the risks attached to the use of prohibited items, the legislation requires that licensed businesses supervise their use at all times. This could significantly increase the costs of certain productions and have a negative impact on the entertainment industry. The Sub-Committee suggests that a solution be sought to allow the use of some of these items in a production without the need for supervision, particularly with respect to replica firearms. We would like to see this issue covered in future regulations.

3. BORDER CROSSINGS

Most of the witnesses' concerns with respect to impediments for non-residents coming to Canada revolved around the multiple payment of the $50 fee. Some witnesses, however, were also concerned that the process established for border crossings might discourage potential clients. The Sub-Committee shares this concern, not only in relation to non-residents.

The Sub-Committee believes that every individual and business who is involved in moving goods regulated under this legislation in and out of the country should have access to a system that is streamlined, simple and easy to use. Therefore, we believe that this process should be developed to ensure that it will be as user friendly as possible.

4. EMPLOYEE EXEMPTIONS

The Sub-Committee has left one if its most important recommendations for the end. Subsection 9(3) of the Firearms Act would require every employee of a business, except for carriers, who handles fully-manufactured firearms, prohibited weapons, restricted weapons, prohibited devices or prohibited ammunition, to be the holder of a licence authorizing the acquisition of restricted firearms. Because of the fairly wide definition of business, this provision will cover many individuals.

The Sub-Committee notes that section 97 of the Firearms Act provides that a provincial minister may exempt employees from the application in that province of any provision of the Act or the regulations or Part III of the Criminal Code, for a period not exceeding one year in respect of anything done by them in the course of the employment.

The Sub-Committee urges a broad application of this exemption to ensure its use in appropriate cases where there is no concern for public safety. The Sub-Committee will provide some examples that were brought to its attention but this should not be considered as comprehensive. The Sub-Committee is convinced that expansive use of this exemption will go a long way in satisfying the concerns of many of the witnesses who appeared before the Sub-Committee.

One example where this exemption might be applied concerns legion employees who would only handle firearms and other specified items as a secondary aspect to their employment. For example, if a legion employee handles a firearm for the purpose of setting up a display but otherwise does not handle firearms in the course of his or her employment, an exemption would appear to be appropriate. This would not alleviate the need for at least one licensed person to be responsible for the firearms.

It should be noted that the Sub-Committee also believes that this exemption should be liberally applied in relation to commercial businesses. In cases where the employees primary duties do not include the handling of such items, or where it is evident that the handling of such items by the employee does not raise safety concerns because of the security measures put in place by the business, the employee should be considered for an exemption.

The Sub-Committee realizes that the power to exempt is left in the hands of the provincial minister and would urge them to utilize this exemption in all of the appropriate cases.

;