This Web page has been archived on the Web.

1993 Report of the Auditor General of Canada

Assistant Auditor General: Richard B. Fadden
Responsible Auditor: Alan Gilmore

Main Points

27.1 Canada's gun control program seeks to reduce accidental, intentional and criminal misuse of firearms, to keep guns out of the hands of those who should not have them and to encourage and ensure responsible gun ownership and use. The framework for the current regime was instituted in 1978 and refined in 1991.

27.2 Canada's gun control program is controversial and complex. Evaluation of the program is therefore essential to give the Canadian public and members of Parliament the assurance that its objectives are being met. The program has been evaluated once, but we found weaknesses in the methodology that significantly reduce the extent to which the government, members of Parliament and the Canadian public can rely on the evaluation to feel assured that the gun control program is effective.

27.3 As well, our review of the new regulations indicated that important data, needed to assess the potential benefits and future effectiveness of the regulations, were not available at the time the regulations were drafted. Because of this, we believe it is important that the measures chosen by the government be evaluated at the earliest opportunity.

27.4 We reviewed with law enforcement authorities the issue of a potential firearms smuggling problem. We found that major police forces are concerned that a serious firearms smuggling problem may exist and could be increasing. We recommend that the issue be comprehensively reviewed, as previously recommended by parliamentary committees.

27.5 The gun control program is administered by the federal and provincial/territorial governments. In July 1993 the Department of Justice informed the Treasury Board that implementation and co-operation could be in jeopardy unless funding concerns are resolved.

Introduction

27.6 Available data indicate that there are about one million legally registered restricted weapons in Canada, and suggest that there are about five million legally held unrestricted firearms. The Criminal Code defines restricted weapons and requires that they be registered to be held legally. Handguns are the most common type of restricted weapon. The Criminal Code also defines prohibited weapons, which cannot be held legally. Machine guns are an example of a prohibited weapon. All other firearms, such as hunting rifles and shotguns, are considered unrestricted and do not need to be registered.

27.7 Canada's gun control program seeks to reduce accidental, intentional and criminal misuse of firearms, to keep guns out of the hands of those who should not have them, and to encourage and ensure responsible gun ownership and use. The program is authorized by the Criminal Code (sections 84 to 117) and by several regulations.

Specifically, the program is intended to:

  • make it more difficult for persons who should not have firearms to acquire them legally, by screening individuals who wish to acquire firearms and training them in firearms safety;
  • reduce the possibility of accidents, intentional misuse and theft through requirements for storage, display, handling and transportation of firearms;
  • reduce the risk to public safety by restricting or prohibiting ownership of specific types of firearms and other weapons, including parts, components and accessories;
  • prohibit potentially dangerous gun users from legally owning or using firearms, through court orders; and
  • deter the criminal use of firearms, by sentencing provisions.
27.8 The screening and firearms safety training requirements apply only to individuals who acquire firearms in the future. Those who already own firearms do not have to meet these requirements unless they wish to renew their firearms acquisition certificates. As well, the legislation provides for grandfathering certain firearms that are now prohibited weapons. For example, automatic firearms that have been converted to fire as semi-automatics are now prohibited. Individuals who owned these firearms on 1 October 1992 are permitted to keep them, so long as the firearms were registered as restricted weapons by that date.

27.9 The program is administered by the federal and provincial/territorial governments, generally through the Chief Provincial/Territorial Firearms Officers and provincial/territorial and local police agencies. Costs paid by the federal government are governed by federal-provincial financial agreements negotiated under the authority of section 111 of the Criminal Code .

27.10 The Department of Justice has overall responsibility for the gun control program.

Audit Scope

Focus on recent amendments to legislation and new regulations
27.11 Canada has had gun control in one form or another for many years. The framework for the current regime was instituted in 1978 and refined in 1991. As part of our Regulatory Review audit, we examined how the amendments to the legislation and several new regulations were developed. We reviewed the information provided to ministers, members of Parliament and the public.

27.12 The most recent round of amendments to the Criminal Code started in 1990, when Bill C-80 was tabled in Parliament. The subject matter of this bill was referred to a special committee chaired by MP John Reimer, who conducted a wide investigation into the subject of gun control. The results of the committee's review were published in February 1991 and included 32 recommendations. The committee recommended that the federal government table, and Parliament enact, the legislation necessary to implement the committee's recommendations as soon as possible.

27.13 Bill C-80 died on the order paper and was followed in 1991 by Bill C-17, which incorporated many of the recommendations of the Reimer Committee. Bill C-17 was referred to a legislative committee chaired by MP Blaine Thacker. Bill C-17 was given royal assent in 1991 and most sections have now been proclaimed into law.

27.14 In addition to the amendments to the Criminal Code , several new regulations authorized by Bill C-17 have been approved to implement parts of the gun control program. The Criminal Code now requires that all regulations made under section 116(1) be laid before Parliament for review "at least thirty sitting days" before their effective date. Appropriate committee reviews are authorized, but not required. The Reimer Committee recommended that this be done in order to make the regulation-making process as transparent as possible and to ensure that the interests and expertise of firearms owners are duly taken into account when regulations are both made and amended.

27.15 The regulations were tabled in March 1992 and were reviewed by the Standing Committee on Justice and the Solicitor General, chaired by MP Bob Horner. The Committee reported the results of its review in June 1992 and made 37 recommendations, most of which suggested changes to the proposed regulations. Many of these recommendations were accepted by the government.

27.16 The regulations we focussed on are the following:

  • the Storage, Display, Handling and Transportation of Certain Firearms Regulations (SOR/92-459);
  • the Firearms Acquisition Certificate Regulations (SOR/92-461);
  • the Cartridge Magazine Control Regulations (SOR/92-460, amended by SOR/93-366); and
  • the Genuine Gun Collector Regulations (SOR 92-435).
27.17 Implementing the changes to the gun control program brought about by Bill C-17 is a complex task. It requires the co-operation of the provinces and territories. According to the Department, the program has been phased in to reduce the possibility of public confusion, to maximize public information efforts and to ease the administrative effort. The approach was announced by the Minister in July 1992.

27.18 We did not examine other regulations, such as orders-in-council specifying prohibited and restricted weapons.

27.19 In recognition of the wide scope of the gun control legislation and regulations, we reviewed material provided by the departments of Justice, National Revenue and External Affairs, the Ministry of the Solicitor General and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. We also sought the views of several provinces and specialists in the area.

Observations and Recommendations

27.20 Canada's gun control program is controversial and complex. Evaluation of the program is therefore essential to give the Canadian public and members of Parliament the assurance that its objectives are being met. A more up-to-date evaluation of the program is essential.

27.21 Testimony before parliamentary committees, and our own review, indicate that there may be a serious firearms smuggling problem. If this were the case, it would significantly weaken the effectiveness of the government's gun control program, particularly with respect to keeping firearms from being used in criminal activity. Thus, we are concerned that the government has not responded to parliamentary recommendations to undertake a comprehensive review of the matter.

27.22 The Department of Justice has not concluded financial agreements with the provinces and territories. Given the importance of co-operation with the provinces and territories to the effective administration of this program, we question why these agreements have not been renegotiated on a timely basis.

It Is Essential to Know whether the Gun Control Program Is Effective

27.23 The current gun control regime was instituted in 1978. An initial evaluation of the impact of the program was conducted over a three-year period starting in 1979. The evaluation's final report was published in 1983. The objective of the evaluation was to assess the impact of the 1978 legislation by comparing pre- and post-legislation data on firearms and by conducting trend analyses to observe changes that had occurred since the legislation was implemented. The evaluation concluded that the 1978 legislation had had a moderate impact on the use of firearms.

27.24 The Department of Justice used the evaluation, supplemented by updated statistical reports on firearms-related offences and deaths, to demonstrate that the 1978 gun control legislation had had a major effect in reducing criminal activity involving firearms and in reducing the number of accidental deaths. It noted, however, that the number of suicides involving firearms had not changed.

Weaknesses in evaluation methodology
27.25 The evaluation tried to address many of the key program effectiveness issues. However, we found several weaknesses in the methodology, which significantly reduce the extent to which the government, members of Parliament and the Canadian public can rely on the evaluation to be assured that the gun control program is effective.

27.26 For example, we are concerned that no tests of statistical significance were calculated for any of the report's observations. Tests of statistical significance are necessary because they indicate whether the results could have happened by chance or whether there is a reasonable basis for concluding why they happened.

27.27 We calculated tests of significance on much of the data found in the evaluation. These data included such things as the percentage of firearms-related homicides before the introduction of the legislation in 1978 and the percentage after. We found that many of the observed differences in the data before 1978 and after could have occurred by chance. More and different testing would be necessary before these differences could be attributed to the 1978 legislation.

27.28 We also are concerned that most of the evaluation's conclusions on changes in firearms incidents over time may have been premature. The evaluation included only four post-legislation years, so the comparisons with the pre-legislation situation may be unreliable. The differences noted could be due to random fluctuations occurring over the time period or to other factors, such as economic ones. Many pre- and post-legislation observations are needed for a reliable estimation of trends over time.

Evaluation of new regulations needed
27.29 Our review of the new regulations indicated that important data, needed to assess the potential benefits and future effectiveness of the regulations, were not available at the time the regulations were drafted. The government proceeded with new regulations for reasons of public policy.

27.30 Because the data were not available when the regulations were drafted, we believe it is important that the measures chosen by the government be evaluated at the earliest opportunity. This should help Parliament, the government and stakeholders determine whether these measures have been effective in meeting policy objectives, and should indicate whether any adjustments are needed. Particular issues that should be addressed in the evaluation are the extent of reduction in accidents, suicides and criminal activity involving firearms that resulted from the regulations, possible alternative means to achieve the objectives of the regulations and the effectiveness of the enforcement measures in place.

27.31 Example: storage, display, handling and transportation of certain firearms. These regulations address concerns that accidents and thefts occur because of poor storage. The Reimer Committee recommended that the gun control program deal with safe storage requirements for all firearms owners.

27.32 However, there is currently insufficient information on the number of accidents and shootings related to poor storage conditions to allow an assessment of the potential benefits of the regulations. Also, enforcement of these regulations will depend heavily on provincial and local resources and priorities. Insufficient enforcement could impair the effectiveness of the regulations in achieving their objectives.

27.33 Example: cartridge magazine control. These regulations are designed to place limits on the firepower of certain automatic and semi-automatic firearms. Again, there is insufficient information on the number of criminal offences typically committed with high-firepower firearms and who commits them.

27.34 As well, the government considered several alternatives to achieving the objectives of these regulations, including setting a single limit for all types of firearms and limiting the capacity for rimfire firearms. An evaluation would help determine whether the alternative chosen by the government was the best one under the circumstances.

27.35 Finally, concerns about enforcement of the Cartridge Magazine Control Regulations were raised by key stakeholders. Furthermore, the Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement for the regulations did not describe how enforcement officials would go about detecting an offence prior to laying a charge. It is important to know how effectively these regulations are being enforced.

Insufficient information on the administration of the firearms acquisition certificate screening system
27.36 As we note elsewhere in this Report, the gun control program is administered by the federal and provincial/territorial governments. The Reimer Committee heard testimony that the administration of the program, particularly the firearms acquisition certificate (FAC) provisions, was not uniform across the country. The Committee expressed concern about this issue and recommended uniform screening of FAC applicants. The government has taken steps to improve the uniformity of the screening procedures.

27.37 Lack of uniformity in administration could have detrimental effects on the overall effectiveness of the program. For example, an ineffective investigation of FAC applications in one province could weaken the screening system nationally. The last evaluation touched on the issue of provincial administration but did not explore it in any depth. Therefore, we believe this issue needs to be evaluated in depth.

Conclusion
27.38 We believe it is essential that the Department of Justice evaluate the effectiveness of the program again. Members of Parliament and the Canadian public need to know whether the means the government has chosen to achieve the program's objectives are working.

Potential Smuggling Problem

A comprehensive review of the extent of smuggling of firearms into Canada has not been undertaken, as recommended by parliamentary committees
27.39 Canada's gun control program seeks to make it more difficult for persons who should not have firearms to acquire them legally. It also restricts or prohibits the legal possession of certain firearms. However, if these firearms could be easily smuggled into the country, then the objectives of the gun control program would be undermined.

27.40 There are several factors that increase the potential for a serious firearms smuggling problem in Canada. Many firearms that are either restricted or prohibited in Canada are easily available in the United States. Canada's long border with the United States is difficult to protect. The restrictions on acquiring firearms legally in Canada can make smuggling financially attractive.

27.41 During their review of the amendments to the Criminal Code and the new regulations, the Reimer and Horner committees heard testimony that there is a serious firearms smuggling problem in Canada. The Reimer Committee recommended that the federal government undertake a comprehensive review of all issues relating to the illegal entry of firearms into Canada. The Horner Committee recommended that the government take all possible steps to strengthen the border controls necessary to keep illegal firearms and firearms accessories from being smuggled into Canada.

27.42 In response, the Minister of Justice proposed amendments to the Criminal Code to increase the maximum term of imprisonment for importing a prohibited weapon, or parts designed exclusively for manufacturing a prohibited weapon, from five years to ten years. The maximum imprisonment for importing a restricted weapon without a permit remains at five years.

27.43 However, the government has not undertaken a study to determine the extent of the problem and whether, in the light of other priorities, resources should be allocated to deal with the problem.

27.44 We tried to develop an estimate of the size of the firearms smuggling problem in Canada. We were unable to do so because of a lack of readily accessible information on offences involving firearms, the types of firearms used and the origin of firearms that were seized.

27.45 In the absence of such data, we reviewed the issue with law enforcement authorities. We found that major police forces are concerned that a serious firearms smuggling problem may exist and that the problem could be increasing.

27.46 Given the concerns raised, we believe that the issue should be comprehensively reviewed to determine whether a serious firearms smuggling problem exists in Canada. This type of review is what the Reimer Committee called for in 1991.

Financial Agreements with the Provinces and Territories

Delays in concluding financial agreements with the provinces and territories may weaken the gun control program
27.47 The gun control program is administered by the federal and provincial/territorial governments. Co-operation among these governments is essential if the program is to be administered effectively. One of the more contentious issues in the administration of the program is who will bear the cost. Section 111 of the Criminal Code allows the Governor in Council to enter into agreements with the provinces and territories to reimburse them for certain costs actually incurred in administering the program.

27.48 Financial agreements have existed since 1979. They were extended several times and expired on 31 March 1993. The federal government is in the process of renegotiating the agreements with the provinces and territories. The Department of Justice completed a framework for the agreements in December 1992, and Treasury Board approval to proceed with the negotiations was received in August 1993.

27.49 The Department informed Treasury Board in July 1993 that successful implementation of the program, particularly the important Safety Education program, depends on provincial and territorial government co-operation. The Department also indicated that implementation and co-operation could be in jeopardy unless funding concerns are resolved. The implementation date for the Safety Education program has already been deferred at the request of the provinces and territories. If the financial agreements are not concluded by the deferral date of 1 January 1994, further delays may be encountered.

Recommendations

27.50 The Department of Justice should undertake a rigorous evaluation of the gun control program.

Department's response: The current gun control initiative made only limited use of the 1983 evaluation. More reliance was placed on the statistics available since the seventies on homicides, suicides, accidental deaths and robberies. In any event, the legislation and regulations were driven by clear public interest considerations, which needed to be acted upon despite the absence of precise data.

The Department monitors the gun control program on an ongoing basis. In order to supplement this, the Department had always intended to undertake an evaluation of this initiative. Evaluation plans have been under development for some time but any new evaluable issues raised by the Auditor General and not included in our plans will be added.

27.51 The government should undertake a comprehensive review to determine the extent of the firearms smuggling problem.

Department's response: The Department of Justice, in consultation with other concerned federal, provincial and territorial departments and agencies, will examine the extent of firearms smuggling and what additional measures need to be taken to control the problem.

27.52 The Department of Justice should inform Parliament about the status of negotiations on the financial agreements with the provinces and territories and the impact of any delays on the implementation of the program.

Department's response: It is unlikely that negotiation of the new financial agreements will be completed before May 1994. However, we believe that implementation of the gun control program has not been adversely affected by the timing of the renegotiation process. Indeed, parts of the program, including the firearms safety courses, could not have been developed earlier, even if the agreements had been in place. The provinces and territories have been kept informed of our progress with respect to renegotiation and have proceeded in good faith to implement the new gun control measures.

The existing mechanisms for reporting to Parliament, we believe, offer parliamentarians opportunities to seek information, including that relating to negotiations of financial agreements.