Before criticizing the inelegant intervention by Carey Price, who denounced the latest efforts of the Trudeau government to ban assault weapons on the eve of the anniversary of the Polytechnique massacre, one must ask the following question . Why did the Liberals table a blanket amendment that expanded the definition of prohibited weapons as well as a 307-page long list of models to be banned, on November 22, at the end of the parliamentary committee study of a bill whose initial scope was limited to banning handguns? The answer is strictly partisan, it was indeed a political tactic. Mr. Price’s only sin was to fall into the trap that the Liberals had knowingly set for their Conservative opponents.
The Liberals must have known that the introduction without notice of such changes in parliamentary committee would provoke an outcry from the firearms lobby as well as associations representing hunters. They had no doubt even counted on criticism from conservatives, knowing that the polarization of the gun control debate has benefited Liberal troops in the 2021 federal election.
The approach of a by-election in the riding of Mississauga-Lakeshore also had something to do with it. The Liberals wanted to use the anniversary of the Polytechnique tragedy—they were aiming for C-21 to be adopted before that date—to do a good job of communicating by granting the wishes of the victims who have long campaigned for a ban on “weapons assault-style firearms.
The Liberals’ trick, however, fell through due to their own incompetence. They had prepared the ground so poorly before tabling their amendments that they were caught off guard when the New Democrats and the Bloc decided to distance themselves from Bill C-21. The definition as well as the list of prohibited weapons include many models of weapons used by hunters even if they were not designed for hunting.
An example of this is the Simonov SKS model, a military weapon popular with hunters due to its affordability. The Liberals had expected opposition from the Conservatives; they had even wished it. But the resolution against C-21 adopted last week by the Assembly of First Nations destabilized the Liberal troops. The so-called Apostles of Reconciliation had attacked the weapons that Aboriginal people say they use to “exercise their Aboriginal and treaty rights to hunt”.
For thousands of Aboriginal people across the country, hunting remains a matter of survival. The non-partisan Premier of the Northwest Territories made a striking statement. “If they haven’t considered the needs of hunters, then I can’t support [C-21]because it would support people starving, ”dropped Caroline Cochrane.
His Liberal counterpart from the Yukon, Sandy Silver, came to the defense of the territory’s Liberal MP, Brendan Hanley, who had announced his opposition to Bill C-21. Federal Rural Economic Development Minister Gudie Hutchings did nothing to calm things down by saying those whose hunting guns were on the banned list could just get another one from the 19,000 models. that would remain legal if Bill C-21 were passed. NDP MP Alistair MacGregor called his comment a “bit insulting” to hunters of modest means.
Federal Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino, who is piloting C-21, finally came out this week to promise a ‘fine-tuning’ of the bill, although his boss had previously said there was no question of changing the definition of weapons prohibited by amendment. “We demonstrate our resolve to get it right and recognize that there are concerns expressed by hunters and Indigenous people surrounding the wording of the amendment,” Mendicino said.
However, federal MPs have now gone on Christmas vacation for several weeks, and the Standing Committee on Security intends to hold additional hearings on C-21 after the holidays, postponing the final adoption of the bill indefinitely. Several speakers are now calling on the Liberals to withdraw their amendments outright and start afresh by holding public hearings across the country on gun control measures.
Since the 2019 election, the Liberals hold almost no rural ridings outside the Atlantic provinces. They therefore care little for the reality of the thousands of Canadians whose shotguns are part of their way of life. If they had taken the time to properly prepare the ground before tabling their controversial amendments, they would probably not find themselves today in the unfortunate situation that we know.
Almost no one trusts them in this matter. The assault weapons buy-back program that should follow the banning of such weapons is still hypothetical. With the imbroglios at passport offices and hiccups in the immigration system, not to mention the millions needlessly gobbled up in the ArriveCAN app, wouldn’t an assault weapons buy-back program be just as doomed to failure ? After all, the Liberals’ “magic touch” too often proves fatal.