Presented by Barbara Byers on Wednesday, 26 May 2010

(Check Against Delivery)

On behalf of the 3.2 million members of the Canadian Labour Congress, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to present our views on Bill C-391, an act that would repeal the long-gun registry.

The Canadian Labour Congress opposes Bill C-391. Our members have debated the issue of gun control in the past at our conventions, and delegates have supported various forms of gun control in Canada, which led us to support the creation of the gun registry in 1995.

We know the debate about gun control and the gun registry can be difficult, but we must keep it in perspective.

The vast majority of Canadians do not own guns.

There are as compelling reasons today as there were in 1995 for a national gun registry:

• to enforce safe storage requirements
• to ensure gun owners are held accountable for all the guns they own, including non-restricted firearms like rifles and shotguns
• to compel gun owners to report missing or stolen firearms
• to reduce the illegal trade in rifles and shotguns
• to give the police and first responders modern tools to protect their health and safety, and to take preventative action
• to trace back stolen guns to their rightful owners.

After a decade of use, first responders and police testify to its effectiveness.

And a database that is consulted thousands of times a day by police across the country can no longer be dismissed by opponents as useless.

In domestic violence situations and child endangerment situations, both police and social workers can access the registry to assess the situation they are heading into, are able to take precautions and enter dangerous situations knowing what they may expect on the other side of the door.

We know that rifles and shotguns are the guns most available in people's homes.

A gun in the home increases risk factors on many levels, risks that the registry helps mitigate by providing those first responders with vital information ­-- the number of guns in the home and more importantly what kind of guns.

It allows them to assess risk to themselves and to others, particularly in domestic violence situations.

Rifles and shotguns are the guns most often used in domestic violence situations.

They are the guns most often used in suicides, particularly those involving youth. And they are the guns most often used to kill police officers.

We are aware that in one high profile case, a registered gun left at the scene of the murders of four RCMP officers in Mayerthorpe, Alberta was traced back to its owner through the registry.

The owner was eventually convicted as an accessory in the killings of those officers.

The registry clearly plays an important role for our nation's police forces and first responders.

We do not ignore the fact that mistakes were made when the gun registry was established.

Cost overruns were documented by the Auditor General in 2002, although most of the costs were spent on the licencing aspect of the 1995 law – screening and licencing owners, not the registry itself.

Any new program has unanticipated costs as this government has learned recently.

The Globe and Mail reported last week the estimated costs to provinces for the federal government's Truth in Sentencing Act, ending the two-for-one credit for pre-trial jail time, has gone from an estimated $90 million over the next two years to $2 billion over five years, according to Justice Minister Vic Toews.

Although the Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page estimates the projected costs at $7 to $10 billion over five years.

Clearly only time will tell.

But regardless of whether you feel that the money setting up the licencing and gun registry was money well-spent or not, it is money spent.

Its current annual operating costs do provide value – particularly in terms of the access to the database by police across the country thousands of times a day.

The vast majority of gun owners in this country are clearly law abiding citizens – they continue to register their guns despite this government's attempts in recent years to undermine the registry.

As one member of a CLC affiliate said recently at his union's convention debating a resolution to support the gun registry: “I am a proud hunter. And I am proud to register my rifle.”

As many have pointed out, registering guns is not an onerous task.
When compared to the rules and regulations governing car ownership, the restrictions are put into perspective:

• you need a licence to operate a car
• you must renew your licence every year
• in many provinces you must bring your car for emissions testing before you can renew your licence
• you are required by law to wear a seat belt in your car
• you need to purchase expensive insurance, otherwise you cannot operate your car
• in some provinces you can’t talk on your cellphone while driving your car
• in some provinces you must buy and put snow tires on your car in the winter.

In contrast, gun owners need a licence to own a gun.

The licence can be revoked if you use your gun recklessly. You need to register guns when you buy them.

You must store your guns safely.

In 1995, a majority of Canadians favoured even stricter gun control legislation than the Firearms Act mandated.

The same can be said today.

Our own polling by Vector Research in January this year continues to show majority support by Canadians to abolish gun ownership outright.

The Firearms Act of 1995 is a uniquely Canadian example of compromise -- a balance between the interests of those who favour stricter controls on firearms and those who prefer less restrictions.

Bill C-391 eliminates that balance, eliminates the tool used by police to work safely, eliminates the tool that helps keep our communities safe, and that has helped reduce deaths by shotguns and rifles.

Related Publication

CLC Statement to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security on Bill C-391