Article content continued

“If the committee’s going to be of any value, we have to get evidence. We need to hear from witnesses. We need to hear from experts. We should have some idea what other countries are doing if we can make any sensible recommendation,” Major recalled Tuesday.

“And one of (the minister’s) staff said, ‘Oh, we can’t do that. It would just involve too many people.’ ”

“I said, ‘Well, I don’t see much point in you telling us what you’ve been doing. What are we supposed to do about it? We can’t say what you’ve done is reasonable or unreasonable unless we know what the evidence is that led to that conclusion.’

“To simply be told what the government had done without any input from us, I felt, well, we’re just being used. You know, there’s a committee that’s not doing anything, but it looks pretty good on paper.”

In her resignation letter, Provost said the government repeatedly ignored calls for an overhaul of the firearms-classification system — a move that could put tighter controls on some semi-automatic rifles.

She also claimed the committee contributed nothing to the Liberal firearms bill, C-71, recently passed by Parliament — legislation she called extremely timid.

The bill expanded the scope of background checks on those who want to acquire guns, strengthened record-keeping requirements for sales and required purchasers to present valid firearms licences.

The committee examined all elements of the bill before its drafting and provided valuable insights to the government, said Scott Bardsley, a spokesman for Goodale. For instance, the government agreed with the committee’s recommendation to allow restricted and prohibited firearms to be transported to a shooting range without requiring a written authorization.