PUBLICATION:              Montreal Gazette

DATE:                         2003.07.21

EDITION:                    Final

SECTION:                  Editorial / Op-ed

PAGE:                         A20

SOURCE:                   The Gazette

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

Put the Gun Registry out of its misery

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

The case for maintaining the national firearms-registration system weakens with each new example of mismanagement. A well-intentioned initiative has been so wretchedly bungled it increasingly appears it would be best simply to put the costly mess out of its misery.

The gun registry was proposed eight years ago as crime-fighting tool to enable police to trace stolen guns and guns used in the commission of crimes. But so far, it has proved itself primarily an annoyance for law-abiding gun owners and a classic example of profligate government spending; the registry now rivals the folly of the Olympic Stadium.

Actually, that's a bad rap on Jean Drapeau. Last December, Auditor-General Sheila Fraser issued the stunning assessment the gun-registry program would cost $1 billion, 500 times the originally budgeted $2 million, whereas Drapeau's baby cost merely 100 times the first estimate.

This month, it was reported the gun-registry bill includes $13 million in travel expenses racked up over six years by staff of the Canadian Firearms Centre, which runs the program. There was also a $500,000 tab for "hospitality" - code for wining and dining. A pittance in the total cost, perhaps - and a piffle compared with the $200-million computer system that didn't work - but that $13 million is, all by itself, nearly seven times the estimate for the whole program.

Now it has come out Fraser warned the government earlier this year about an audit the firearms centre commissioned from a private accounting firm (contracted at a cost of roughly $100,000) that ostensibly certified the integrity and accuracy of its books. In her judgment, this study was not just woefully incomplete but also an attempted end-run around her office, in violation of both the Financial Administration Act and the Auditor-General Act.

Then gun-registry critics were given more ammunition in the recent tale of a hunting rifle seized by police in Ontario. It had been reported stolen in Quebec more than a decade ago but remained in circulation until last week. In the interim, it passed three separate gun-registry checks and was duly registered to the latest owner two months ago.

It's impossible to tell how many more such illicit weapons the registry has allowed to slip through its screening process, never mind the ones it doesn't know about at all. This might have been merely an isolated glitch, but the management record of the firearms centre hardly inspires confidence.

Critics charge the gun registry was misguided in its very conception, and there has been little persuasive evidence the system is proving sufficiently effective as a crime -busting mechanism to justify its mammoth cost. We don't believe there should be unrestricted access to firearms, but this particular tool for law enforcement, which manages to have an infrastructure both cumbersome and inefficient, really has no reason to live any longer.

Last week, Canadian officials at a United Nations conference on arms trafficking were promoting the Canadian registry as a model for an international gun-tracking system. We wonder how they managed to keep a straight face.

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

NOTE: A version of this Montreal Gazette editorial was also published in The Edmonton Journal today (Page A10) under the headline: "A wretched bungle."