Alberta Justice Minister says Feds planning to use RCMP to confiscate firearms starting in PEI

Federal confiscation program: Minister Shandro

Minister of Justice Tyler Shandro issued the following statement on the federal firearms confiscation program:

“Last week, Minister Mendicino admitted that the federal government has still not figured out how to implement their firearms confiscation program.

“This admission comes shortly after the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police called on the federal government to not to use police services to confiscate firearms.

“Now, media reports have drawn attention to a federal government memo that outlines Minister Mendicino’s plans to confiscate firearms across Canada.

“The memo admits that efforts to find private sector companies to implement the federal firearms confiscation program failed this summer.

“With no private sector companies willing to participate, the memo outlines how the RCMP will first be deployed to Prince Edward Island (PEI), which has been deemed to be an easy ‘low-risk’ target.

“The federal government is treating PEI as a ‘pilot’ that will help them learn on the job as they implement their confiscation plan through trial and error.

“This ‘program’ is expected to cost a billion dollars or more and has supposedly been in the works for three years.

“Despite a mountain of money and years worth of lead time, Ottawa appears to be lost – especially given their latest attack on hunting rifles and shotguns – at minimum, they should proactively extend the amnesty that is currently scheduled to end in October 2023.

“Such a decision, however, would involve showing Canadian firearms owners a measure of decency, something that Minister Mendicino and this federal government is seemingly incapable of.”

—–

Public Safety Canada’s Buyback Program

Overview

The Government of Canada committed to implementing a mandatory buyback program so that the assault-style firearms that became prohibited on May 1, 2020 are safely removed from our communities. Public Services and Procurement Canada’s role is to provide procurement services to Public Safety Canada (PS) to support their implementation of the buyback program.

Mandate

As of May 1, 2020, the Government of Canada has prohibited over 1,500 models of assault-style firearms (ASFs) and certain components of some newly-prohibited firearms. New maximum thresholds for muzzle energy and bore diameter are also in place. Any firearm that exceeds these is now prohibited. A Criminal Code amnesty period is currently in effect to October 30, 2023. The amnesty is designed to protect individuals or businesses who, at the time the prohibition came into force, were in lawful possession of a newly prohibited firearm from criminal liability while they take steps to comply with the law.

The primary intent of the buyback program would be to safely buyback these now prohibited firearms from society, while offering fair compensation to businesses and lawful owners impacted by the prohibition. PSPC is currently examining options for implementation of the buyback program, including the potential of contracting out specific activities.

Key activities

The program approach currently being considered by PS senior management envisages 2 phases, with a pilot in the first phase that would inform the national roll-out of the program:

phase 1: commence in December 2022 and conclude at the end of the amnesty period. Primarily led by Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) with support from PS and other government departments. Prince Edward Island (PE) will be used as a pilot and will be the first point of collection based on the smaller number of firearms. As a result, lessons learned, gaps analysis and risk assessment would inform the phase 2 national roll-out
phase 2: national roll-out is planned for spring 2023 once an information management/information technology (IM/IT) case management system is in place. It will be implemented in collaboration with other government departments, provincial, municipal and territorial governments and potential Industry partners

Public Services and Procurement posted a request for information on July 14, 2022 seeking feedback from industry on potential capacities to support delivery of the buyback program. It closed on August 31, 2022 and with very limited interest from the industry.

Partners and stakeholders

The program owner is Public Safety Canada. They are responsible for the buyback planning and oversight.

Public Services and Procurement Canada has been supporting PS with the buyback program since August 2021 supporting the development of procurement strategies for the delivery of the various potential requirements such as:

collection and transportation
professional services
tracking
storage solutions
package inspection
destruction
post-destruction recycling

Shared Services Canada will assist with procurement of information technology (IT) solutions and other required IT support, based on its mandate.

The RCMP will start collection of ASFs in December 2022. They are also supporting the buyback program by providing a high level process map or written description of the programmatic phases.

Employment and Social Development Canada may support the buyback program with call-centres and payment solutions for the compensation.

Provincial, municipal and territorial governments are also being engaged to support the implementation and program delivery.

Key considerations

The prohibition applies to all current and future firearm variants that meet the criteria—now, over 1,800 firearms. These firearms can no longer be legally used, sold, or imported.

Currently owners have the option to dispose of their firearm by surrendering it to police, deactivating through an approved business or exporting the firearm with a valid export permit, all without government compensation. The buyback program aims to offer fair compensation to affected owners and businesses.

Work at the officials level is ongoing to develop, design and engage on the program. This includes public consultations on the government’s price list, which was posted on July 28, 2022 on Public Safety’s website and would be used to establish compensation levels for affected firearms.

Up Next

Japan PM sees LNG Canada as a ‘flagship’ facility to help improve world energy security while lowering emissions

Don't Miss

Cancelling Keystone XL cost thousands of jobs and billions in GDP: U.S. government report

Government of Alberta

This is a news release from the Government of Alberta.

Follow Author

New surveillance teams led by the Alberta Sheriffs working with local police in rural communities

Alberta / 4 weeks ago

Just in time for Canada Day weekend! Crescent Falls ready to be enjoyed again

Alberta / 2 months ago

Alberta’s government honours the province’s top athletes, teams, coaches and officials with 2023 Sport Recognition Awards

Alberta

Alberta awash in corporate welfare

Published on July 26, 2024

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Matthew Lau

To understand Ottawa’s negative impact on Alberta’s economy and living standards, juxtapose two recent pieces of data.

First, in July the Trudeau government made three separate “economic development” spending announcements in Alberta, totalling more than $80 million and affecting 37 different projects related to the “green economy,” clean technology and agriculture. And second, as noted in a new essay by Fraser Institute senior fellow Kenneth Green, inflation-adjusted business investment (excluding residential structures) in Canada’s extraction sector (mining, quarrying, oil and gas) fell 51.2 per cent from 2014 to 2022.

The productivity gains that raise living standards and improve economic conditions rely on business investment. But business investment in Canada has declined over the past decade and total economic growth per person (inflation-adjusted) from Q3-2015 through to Q1-2024 has been less than 1 per cent versus robust growth of nearly 16 per cent in the United States over the same period.

For Canada’s extraction sector, as Green documents, federal policies—new fuel regulations, extended review processes on major infrastructure projects, an effective ban on oil shipments on British Columbia’s northern coast, a hard greenhouse gas emissions cap targeting oil and gas, and other regulatory initiatives—are largely to blame for the massive decline in investment.

Meanwhile, as Ottawa impedes private investment, its latest bundle of economic development announcements underscores its strategy to have government take the lead in allocating economic resources, whether for infrastructure and public institutions or for corporate welfare to private companies.

Consider these federally-subsidized projects.

A gas cloud imaging company received $4.1 million from taxpayers to expand marketing, operations and product development. The Battery Metals Association of Canada received $850,000 to “support growth of the battery metals sector in Western Canada by enhancing collaboration and education stakeholders.” A food manufacturer in Lethbridge received $5.2 million to increase production of plant-based protein products. Ermineskin Cree Nation received nearly $400,000 for a feasibility study for a new solar farm. The Town of Coronation received almost $900,000 to renovate and retrofit two buildings into a business incubator. The Petroleum Technology Alliance Canada received $400,000 for marketing and other support to help boost clean technology product exports. And so on.

When the Trudeau government announced all this corporate welfare and spending, it naturally claimed it create economic growth and good jobs. But corporate welfare doesn’t create growth and good jobs, it only directs resources (including labour) to subsidized sectors and businesses and away from sectors and businesses that must be more heavily taxed to support the subsidies. The effect of government initiatives that reduce private investment and replace it with government spending is a net economic loss.

As 20th-century business and economics journalist Henry Hazlitt put it, the case for government directing investment (instead of the private sector) relies on politicians and bureaucrats—who did not earn the money and to whom the money does not belong—investing that money wisely and with almost perfect foresight. Of course, that’s preposterous.

Alas, this replacement of private-sector investment with public spending is happening not only in Alberta but across Canada today due to the Trudeau government’s fiscal policies. Lower productivity and lower living standards, the data show, are the unhappy results.

Author:

Matthew Lau

Adjunct Scholar, Fraser Institute

Alberta

‘Fireworks’ As Defence Opens Case In Coutts Two Trial

Published on July 25, 2024

Todayville

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Ray McGinnis

Anthony Olienick and Chris Carbert are on trial for conspiracy to commit murder and firearms charges in relation to the Coutts Blockade into mid-February 2022. In opening her case before a Lethbridge, AB, jury on July 11, Olienick’s lawyer, Marilyn Burns stated “This is a political, criminal trial that is un Canadian.” She told the jury, “You will be shocked, and at the very least, disappointed with how Canada’s own RCMP conducted themselves during and after the Coutts protest,” as she summarized officers’ testimony during presentation of the Crown’s case. Burns also contended that “the conduct of Alberta’s provincial government and Canada’s federal government are entwined with the RCMP.” The arrests of the Coutts Four on the night of February 13 and noon hour of February 14, were key events in a decision by the Clerk of the Privy Council, Janice Charette, and the National Security Advisor to the Prime Minister, Jody Thomas, to advise Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to invoke the Emergencies Act. Chief Justice Paul Rouleau, in submitting his Public Order Emergency Commission Report to Parliament on February 17, 2023, also cited events at the Coutts Blockade as key to his conclusion that the government was justified in invoking the Emergencies Act.

Justice David Labrenz cautioned attorney Burns regarding her language, after Crown prosecutor Stephen Johnson objected to some of the language in the opening statement of Olienick’s counsel. Futher discussion about the appropriateness of attorney Burns’ statement to the jury is behind a publication ban, as discussions occurred without the jury present.

Justice Labrenz told the jury on July 12, “I would remind you that the presumption of innocence means that both the accused are cloaked with that presumption, unless the Crown proves beyond a reasonable doubt the essential elements of the charge(s).” He further clarified what should result if the jurors were uncertain about which narrative to believe: the account by the Crown, or the account from the accused lawyers. Labrenz stated that such ambivalence must lead to an acquittal; As such a degree of uncertainty regarding which case to trust in does not meet the “beyond a reasonable doubt” threshold for a conviction.”

On July 15, 2024, a Lethbridge jury heard evidence from a former employer of Olienicks’ named Brian Lambert. He stated that he had tasked Olienick run his sandstone quarry and mining business. He was a business partner with Olienick. In that capacity, Olienick made use of what Lambert referred to as “little firecrackers,” to quarry the sandstone and reduce it in size. Reducing the size of the stone renders it manageable to get refined and repurposed so it could be sold to buyers of stone for other uses (building construction, patio stones, etc.) Lambert explained that the “firecrackers” were “explosive devices” packaged within tubing and pipes that could also be used for plumbing. He detailed how “You make them out of ordinary plumbing pipe and use some kind of propellant like shotgun powder…” Lambert explained that the length of the pipe “…depended on how big a hole or how large a piece of stone you were going to crack. The one I saw was about six inches long … maybe an inch in diameter.”

One of Olienick’s charges is “unlawful possession of an explosive device for a dangerous purpose.” The principal evidence offered up by RCMP to the Crown is what the officers depicted as “pipe bombs” which they obtained at the residence of Anthony Olienick in Claresholm, Alberta, about a two-hour drive from Coutts. Officers entered his home after he was arrested the night of February 13, 2022. Lambert’s testimony offers a plausible common use for the “firecrackers” the RCMP referred to as “pipe bombs.” Lambert added, these “firecrackers” have a firecracker fuse, and in the world of “explosive” they are “no big deal.”

Fellow accused, Chris Carbert, is does not face the additional charge of unlawful possession of explosives for a dangerous purpose. This is the first full week of the case for the defence. The trial began on June 6 when the Crown began presenting its case.

Ray McGinnis is a Senior Fellow with the Frontier Centre for Public Policy who recently attended several days of testimony at the Coutts Two trial.