'Nuclear option': Conservatives decry Liberal move to limit debate on gun bill

The federal government is trying to limit how much time MPs have left to consider changes and debate the Liberal gun control legislation Bill C-21. It's a move the Conservatives called a 'nuclear option,' but one the Liberals and New Democrats say is needed to fend off Official Opposition obstruction.

The federal government is trying to limit how much time MPs have left to consider changes and debate the Liberal gun control legislation Bill C-21.

It's a move the Conservatives called a "nuclear option," but one the Liberals and New Democrats say is needed to fend off Official Opposition obstruction.  

Through what's known as a programming motion, the Liberals are trying to set in stone the House of Commons' plans related to this bill before voting to send it to the Senate, including issuing marching orders regarding the bill's scope and outstanding amendments to the committee currently studying it.

This move from Government House Leader Mark Holland, on a piece of legislation that has now been before the House for almost a year, comes just one week after Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino put forward a series of revised amendments that seek to significantly expand the range of proposed gun control measures in the bill.

The latest ways the Liberals are trying to change the wording of Bill C-21 includes inserting a new prospective Criminal Code "technical definition" of what constitutes a prohibited assault-style firearm meant to "cement in law" a permanent ban on future models. This move has already sparked ire from both gun control and firearms rights groups.

The minister's rethink came after withdrawing an initial amendment package that sparked considerable backlash last fall, largely due to trying to inject an "evergreen" definition for assault-style weapons that would have prohibited hundreds of gun models currently on the market, including some commonly used for sport and hunting. Since pulling the plug on the problematic proposals in February, the legislation had largely been languishing until last week.

If the Liberal programming motion passes as drafted: