The Liberal government’s vision for its international gun control efforts was well articulated in November 1997. Deputy Prime Minister and Solicitor General Herb Gray was in Washington then signing an agreement with the Organization of American States when he said: “This could be the start of a global movement that would spur the development of an instrument to ban firearms worldwide similar to our land-mines initiative.”

Not only are the Liberals’ international efforts based on the fiscal and operational failure of their firearms program at home; but, as in Canada, their efforts are aimed almost exclusively at legally-owned guns owned by law-abiding citizens. The Liberals refuse to do the sensible thing to control the criminal use of guns like hiring more police, beefing up security at our borders and keeping violent criminals in jail or on a short leash after they are released, so they aim their gun policies at easier targets, like peaceable firearm owners.

In addition to a flawed vision and fatally-flawed gun control model, the Liberals persist in keeping Parliament and the people in the dark about their anti-legal gun agenda. Our Access to Information Act requests have been unsuccessful at prying information out of the Liberal government on its international firearms activities. In 2003, the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade effectively kept their activities a secret by assessing us an exorbitant search fee of $4,760 for the information. Meanwhile, the Canada Firearms Program was reporting that Foreign Affairs and International Trade was an important partner in the implementation of the Liberal Firearms Act. However, they kept reporting to Parliament that this important partner’s “direct and indirect costs” were ZERO for each year.

After the Information Commissioner was unable to get the Foreign Affairs and International Trade Department to cough up any information, I filed a written question in the House of Commons. On June 17th, 2005, I got a response. In the last ten years, the department reports that they only invested 21 person-years and $5 million on their international gun control efforts. Unbelievably, in six of the eleven activity areas, they reported No Costs and No Person-Years (see link to response to Order Paper Question Q-144 below). We are left to wonder if the response includes the ten contracts the department entered into with the anti-gun lobbyists working for the Coalition for Gun Control.

After reviewing the Canadian government's response, Mr. Thomas Mason, Executive Secretary of the World Forum on the Future of Sport Shooting Activities said: "I am surprised there is no cost or person-years for United Nations Firearms Protocol negotiations. This was a long process and Canada was always well-represented."

Tony Bernardo, Executive Director of the Canadian Institute for Legislative Action declared, "The financial amounts listed are a joke. Canada has been THE key player in the U.N. attempt to ban all civilian possession of firearms. Since 1994, Canadian bureaucrats have been hosting and attending conferences around the globe, sponsoring expensive gun buy-backs and donating money to anti-gun groups. The lack of transparency in their financial disclosure proves, beyond doubt, they are attempting to hide the truth from Canadians."

Another outrageous fact about this international lobbying activity is that it is all done by nameless bureaucrats without the knowledge or direct support of Parliament. Not only do they negotiate these agreements in secret, the treaties were never even tabled, let alone debated and voted on, in Parliament. This is why my colleague, Conservative Foreign Affairs Critic Stockwell Day proposed a motion on June 3rd, 2005, calling for Canada’s international delegates to vote in accordance with the democratic will as expressed by the House of Commons.

Liberal politicians propose new gun laws saying they must pass them because Canada has entered into these international firearms treaties and agreements. Our contacts who attend these international gun control meetings tell us that Canadian delegates are the key players pushing for these tried and untrue measures. Why does the Liberal government push policies on the international stage that have been proven completely useless at keeping guns out of the hands of criminals in Canada?

I wanted to see for myself what goes on at these meetings, so on April 13th, 2005, I wrote to Foreign Affairs Minister Pierre Pettigrew asking for his permission to attend the United Nations Biennial Meeting on Small Arms and Light Weapons in New York from July 11th to 15th. More than two months have passed, and I’m still waiting for an answer. The firearms program cover-up in Parliament continues.

FOREIGN AFFAIRS & INTERNATIONAL TRADE RESPONSE TO Q-144
http://www.cssa-cila.org/garryb/inthehouse/Questions/05_june17_question.htm

Garry Breitkreuz is the Official Opposition’s Associate Justice Critic on Firearms Issues
and the Member of Parliament for Yorkton-Melville, Saskatchewan.
For more information: www.garrybreitkreuz.com

28 juin 2005 - LES LIBÉRAUX TENTENT DE PROPAGER AU MONDE ENTIER LEUR FOLIE DU CONTRÔLE DES ARMES À FEU