--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

'$1-billion didn't prevent tragedy': PM speaks on gun registry

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OTTAWA - LINDA FRUM: Despite what may have been at the top of your political agenda for the resumption of Parliament on Monday, clearly the topic everyone is now focused upon is the gun registry. Jean Charest, one of your key political allies, has vowed that he will bring pressure upon you not to scrap the gun registry as you have promised to do. What are the likeliest political consequences of this tragic shooting?

STEPHEN HARPER: For the government the consequences will be that we will get all the facts and come forward with proposals, at some point in time, to make sure that such an event is less likely to happen in future. I think we're all concerned how such an individual, however it happened, could get a hold of so many firearms. That's a serious problem that has to be addressed. And when we get all the facts, we'll figure out how to address it. We all feel terrible about the deaths, and obviously, we are very concerned about those who are recovering. But we can't just jump into the dark and make conclusions without facts. That's how we got the gun registry in the first place. That's how we spent a billion dollars on a policy that didn't prevent the tragedy.

LINDA FRUM: One fact that has been confirmed is that the gun that was used was a registered gun.

STEPHEN HARPER: Whether it was registered or unregistered, the gun registry clearly did nothing to prevent the tragedy, which those of us who have spent time studying gun control policy figured out a long time ago. And this is an unfortunate diversion of resources. We want to make sure when we face these kinds of problems, particularly something like this, that we figure out what exactly happened and what things we can do to prevent it.

LINDA FRUM: If you proceed with scrapping the gun registry, as sounds likely, it will become one of many policy decisions you will have made that runs contrary to popular public opinion in Quebec. Your support of Israel over Hezbollah, your extension of Canada's Afghan mission, and your rejection of Kyoto are some others. Conventional wisdom has it that you need Quebec to achieve a majority in the next election. And yet, you've taken a number of stands which would appear to be contrary to your future political interests.

STEPHEN HARPER: I guess I don't accept those judgments. I think that what Quebecers want are policies that actually prevent crime, or prevent dangerous people from having firearms, and not ones that don't. I believe that Quebecers want environmental policies that actually make a difference over the long term to our environmental record in this country. Not just grand slogans. I believe that Quebecers, like other Canadians, want to live in a safe and secure world where Canada contributes, Canada opposes terrorist organizations like Hezbollah, Canadian leaders distance themselves from those organizations, and where we work with our allies to prevent them executing their acts of terror, not just in Canada, but elsewhere. And that we are serious about our obligation to help other less fortunate people live in peace, security, and some degree of prosperity and democracy. And I'm confident about defending those positions in Quebec and anywhere else.

LINDA FRUM: That's not what the poll numbers say about what Quebecers want.

STEPHEN HARPER: I've learned that the so-called numbers, most of the time -- what's the best way to put it -- they are somebody trying to provide democratic legitimacy to their own political opinion. If I believed any numbers I wouldn't be prime minister today. You do what's right. You go to the public, all the time but certainly at election time, and you explain what you're doing and why you're doing it. And then the public will decide what the numbers actually are.