Parses captions for PM Trudeau's daily speeches and presents them in a more human readable format
Rosemary:
That’s the Prime Minister of Canada accompanied by a number of cabinet minister sand the deputy Minister to introduce something unusual at this time, because this is the time when we normally would have an update from the government on their response to COVID-19, to the pandemic. But today they chose to use this time to talk about a decision to restrict 1, 500 – what they callmilitary-style weapons in thiscountry. They say that immediately thatyou will no longer be able tobuy, sell, transport, import oruse military-grade assaultweapons in this country. For the people who already havesome of these weapons you’llhave a two-year period to getrid of them in a safe way. and the government says thatthere will be legislation tofollow with some sort of buybackprogramme that has yet to bedetermined. But that the move today by thegovernment is being done byregulation. Which means that it is adecision from cabinet and it iseffective immediately, and thereis no ability or need forparliament to get involved or todebate this question. So let’s get some reaction fromthe leader of the officialopposition about this nowbecause it’s important to gethis voice here on this move. Conservative leader andrewscheer is joining me now fromottawa. Good to see you, Mr. Scheer. So this was something that thegovernment committed to duringthe election campaign that theywere going to move forward witha ban on assault weapons. They have done that today. and the Prime Minister said thathe spoke to you and otheropposition leaders about yoursupport or the support thatwould be needed moving forward. So I’ll make start by gettingyour reaction to what thegovernment has announced today.
Well, first of all we think that it’s completely inappropriate to make this kind of major policy change at a time when parliament has been effectively shutdown by the liberal government. We’re not able to hold them toaccount, you know, to use question period to make point son this policy. and doing it at a time whencanadians are very concerned about this pandemic we believe is completely unacceptable. We know that what the liberal approach always is is to asklaw-abiding Canadians to followmore laws. We believe that the focus shouldbe on illegally traffickedfirearms and criminalorginisations who smuggle inweapons into our community.
Rosemary:
Okay. To your first point about being able to debate it and discus sit – I take your point. But this is something that they would have done through regulations anyway, the legislation isn’t needed. So what – in what way could you have influenced I guess the conversation moving forward?
Well, look, we’re operating in an environment right now where the house of commons isn’tsitting. Parliamentarians don’t have the avenues like question period to challenge the governmentpolicies. You’re correct in pointing out that this is something they did without legislation. But the context that we’re in is certainly unique. You know, the house of common sis not sitting normally andthey’re using this pandemic as away to bring in a major policydecision. We think that is completelyunacceptable. and we should be focused right now on the pandemic and getting people through the healthcrisis, and now is not the time to make these types of major policy changes, especially whenthey’re proven to be soineffective.
Rosemary:
Okay, I just want to ask you about the buybacklegislation. So this is something that would have to be legislated and would have to go through the regular parliamentary process and because you’re in a limitedformat, sitting only one time in person during the week and two other virtual sessions, it won’thappen now. What would be your first thought about that, that a buybackprogramme I guess has to make sense for the legal gun owner who will have to turn over their weapon after two years.
Well, you know, I think thatwe’re a long way from talking about legislation right now. The house of commons is still not sitting. The motion that was passed means that the government can only bring forward those related to the coronavirus response. What we would like to see in legislation are real measures Togo after illegal firearms. The overwhelming majority of homicides in Canada are committed by smuggled firearms. Solomon Friedman who is an expert on the firearms act, has said that effective gun control is essential, but that gun control theatre is worthless. and what we see with the liberals time and time again is to take people who follow all the rules and follow all of the guidelines and make them follow more laws. Criminals will not be bothered by which category a gun that they have purchased illegally off the streets – they’re not going to care which category afire arm falls into or not. and we’re coming off the heels of a tragedy in Nova Scotia. The shooter in Nova Scotia did not have a licence. Every single one of his firearms were illegal and that did not obviously stop the tragedy. So going after people who traffic in firearms, who smuggle in firearms, who illegally modify firearms in terms of sawing off shotguns and rifles, that’s what will actually save lives in this country. What the liberals are doing is just symbolism over substance.
Rosemary:
So I’m not sure that you heard that he confirmed that two of the long guns used by the Nova Scotia shooter would now appear on this list of banned assault weapons. We know that one of the weapons was from Canada, and others came from the United States. and you’re quite right, he did not have a licence. But bill blair’s point during that press conference is that every legal weapon is illegal at some point. and if you shut down access to these kinds of weapons that are primarily used to – to kill people or target practise, that, you know, that at least allows you to better protect people potentially because they’re just not floating around in society. Do you not agree with that, thatthere’s some benefit to these weapons just not being available in Canada?
Well, the point that I would make is that the government has limited resources and police officers have limited time. So if we’re going to allocate police – pressure limited police time and resources –what is the most effective way to get dangerous guns off ourstreets? we know that many handguns are used for illegal crime. When they’re smuggled overthey’re obviously illegal. When someone doesn’t have alicence, every firearm isillegal. So going after the smugglers and going after shipment coming intocanada for better inspections, that’s where we believe that the allocation should be made. It’s easy but lazy government to ask people who follow all of the rules to follow some more rules. It’s harder to go after criminalorginisations and to inspect the shipment comes intoning ourports.
Rosemary:
I take your point and it did sound like there was an acknowledgement that more needs to be done at the border as well. But I wouldn’t mind you conceding My point that if there were fewer guns that makes it harder for criminals to obtain those guns. I mean, that’s just logic. and it also would seem to me, Mr. Scheer, that you can do all of those things – you can do the things that you are suggesting and you can have ab an on assault weapons.
Well, you may want me to concede your point, roseie, buti’m going to continue to make the point that the firearms that are responsible for the overwhelming number of homicides in this country are illegallyshipped, illegally trafficked. That’s where our attention should turn. We have seen the guns being –firearms being classified, for criminals transporting shipment of narcotics from one part of Ontario to another are not worried about what category their firearm falls into. and people bent on doing evil, again, they don’t have a licence to begin with. It’s not going to stop thesetragedies. But going after illegallytrafficked, illegally shippedfirearms, that will make adifference. Our plan – we support commonsense effective measures to keep firearms out of the hands of dangerous individuals, including more effective screening and more tools and resources to law enforcement and our agencies.
Rosemary:
Let me end onthis, what can you do – and imagine that there will be legal gun owners who will not be happy with this announcement today who may want to challenge it in front of a court. Would you support a court challenge if it came about by acitizens’ group or by legal gunowners? what is your avenue forwardhere?
Well, I’ll leave it to the individual firearms owners and firearms groups to make thosedecisions. We as a political party are offering Canadians alternatives. We had a major plank in our recent election platform on making our communities safer that focused on illegally trafficked firearms and criminalorginisations and additional resources to our police forces across the country. We’ll continue to advocate forthat. and in the next election we’llbe hopeful that Canadians choose for common sense firearms legislation that actually removes guns and illegal weapons from the hands of criminals.
Rosemary:
Mr. Scheer, good of you to make the time today. I appreciate it. The leader of the conservativeparty, Andrew Scheer, here inottawa from his home. We have a couple minutes left here on cbc’s main network and bring back Vassy kapelos for quick break before we take abreak. and so lots there, certainly, and I understand Mr. Scheer’sposition and I think that it will be one that other canadianswill have as well. But this is a big move to do through regulations to ban theseweapons. Vassy, I only have about 30seconds.
Reporter:
Oh, boy, yes, it’s a big move. and there’s political consequences to it. and those who voted liberal, especially in urban areas, want to see it. But the argument especially around the way in which the guns in Nova Scotia were used that were acquired illegally, it does also beg the questions of the government about timing here.
Rosemary:
Yeah, and 10seconds to you or 20 seconds, Katherine.
The question that I still have is it’s not clear to me whether or not the government’scampaign promise is honoured andthey’ll introduce a buyback for all military-style assaultrifles. Not so say they won’t but that’sa question that we’ll want tosee tee legislation to.
Rosemary:
Thank you both very much and we’ll talk to you both in a moment. I’m rosemary Barton and we’llwrap up our coverage here on cbctelevision. It was mostly about this gun control measures introduced by the government today. But we’ll have lots more newsahead. Still on CBC news network andstreaming, of course, oncbcnews. Ca and thank you forwatching. I’m rosemary Barton here inottawa. (♪♪♪)