PUBLICATION: GLOBE AND MAIL
DATE:
WED JAN.07,2004
PAGE:
A1 (ILLUS)
BYLINE:
JOHN IBBITSON
CLASS:
National News
EDITION:
Metro DATELINE: Ottawa ON
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin
targets gun registry
ANALYSIS:
Why don't the Liberals just kill it off? It's politics, writes JOHN IBBITSON
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How
do you get rid of the gun registry without getting rid of the gun registry?
Some
time this year, the most mismanaged government program in Canadian history (try
to think of something else that cost 500 times the original estimate) is
expected to pass the $1-billion mark in spending, a year ahead of the
Auditor-General's gloomy estimate. Public Safety Minister Anne McLellan has
asked Albina Guarnieri, a minister of state, to review the registry; there is
word that Ms. Guarnieri favours making major, though unspecified, changes to the
program.
Cynics
will suggest this latest review is nothing but a political decoy to shore up
support for the Liberals in the West, where the registry is particularly
unpopular. Those cynics would be right.
But
the truth is, the Paul Martin government absolutely must dismantle the registry,
and yet there is absolutely no way it can, and in both cases the reasons are
political.
Mr.
Martin has launched a review of all government programs, with an aim to
ferreting out and eliminating anything wasteful or obsolete. By any rational
measure, the gun registry would top the list.
Aside
from the accumulated costs, the registry's annual budget is $113-million, and,
as often as not, the government has to go back to Parliament for supplementary
funding. Within a few years, costs are expected to pass the $2-billion mark.
And
for what? Though some police forces use the registry, for example, to discover
whether there is a gun in a house where a domestic disturbance is reported,
other forces consider the database a waste of money and resources.
Provincial
governments are so disenchanted with the program that five refuse to assist with
data collection, and eight refuse to enforce the law that makes it a crime not
to register a gun.
And
though violent-crime rates are falling generally, there is not a scintilla of
credible evidence that the registry deters violent crime.
What
on Earth would be the point of a search for government waste that failed to
target a boondoggle costing more than $100-million a year and achieving nothing?
If the registry does not go, then the program review is a farce.
Given
the situation, and given the deep unpopularity of the registry in the West and
in rural Canada generally, the simple solution would be to close the registry
down. And that solution would be politically tempting.
Reversing
course on this file would emphatically demonstrate that this new government is
not afraid to acknowledge and correct the mistakes of the previous regime. Such
a move would increase the Liberal Party's chances in the West, where Mr. Martin
fervently hopes to make gains.
Unfortunately,
closing down the registry is quite impossible.
For
one thing, the decision would represent a political climb-down of unprecedented
proportions, more than offsetting potential political gains.
Imagine
trying to explain to all those gun owners who registered that they went to the
expense and bother for nothing.
The
Conservatives would be able to claim that their opposition to the registry was
justified, and that the $1-billion spent on the program truly was wasted.
The
NDP would use the cancellation as further proof that the Martin government had
shifted irretrievably far to the right. Closing down the gun registry just
before an election would be the equivalent of handing out sticks to your
political opponents and asking them to beat you.
Remember,
the registry is as popular in urban and Central Canada as it is unpopular
elsewhere. It is particularly popular in Quebec, where Marc Lepine's shooting
rampage at the University of Montreal served as a catalyst for the legislation.
Although
abandoning the registry would not be the equivalent of giving up on gun control,
it would be perceived as such, and the political price in urban ridings and in
Quebec would be high.
Finally,
shutting down the registry would reveal the fissures within the Liberal caucus,
which is seriously split on the issue.
Previous
debates within the caucus have reduced MPs on both sides to tears.
Ms.
Guarnieri will look for an alternative that reduces the costs and increases the
effectiveness of the registry while not abandoning it completely.
(It
should be noted that many a report has been commissioned to the same end, to no
avail.)
In
the meantime, the most the Liberals can hope for is that this latest study puts
the issue on the backburner until after the election. Because politically, the
gun registry can only cost Paul Martin votes, no matter how he handles it.