PUBLICATION:              Vancouver Sun

DATE:                         2004.01.08

EDITION:                    Final

SECTION:                  Editorial

PAGE:                         A8

SOURCE:                   Vancouver Sun

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

The best 'review' of the gun registry is to scrap it entirely: That makes the most fiscal and political sense for the new PM

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

Given the amount of money wasted on the gun registry, and the absence of any evidence that it will improve public safety, The Sun has long called on the federal government to scrap it.

But we also recognized that the program would not likely be dismantled because that would amount to the Chretien government admitting it made a mistake.

However, now that the Chretien government is no more, Ottawa no longer needs to save face. So we call on Prime Minister Paul Martin to put an end to this debacle once and for all.

The registry was, of course, doomed from its inception. Then justice minister Allan Rock introduced the program in 1994, even though a briefing note from his own ministry raised serious doubts about its effectiveness. The note read, in part:

"There are real questions about the extent to which these proposals [gun registry] would improve public safety and whether the high costs could be justified."

Undeterred, Mr. Rock went ahead with the registry and the Liberals have championed it ever since.

Even after the original cost estimate of $2 million was found to be a gross underestimate. Even after auditor-general Sheila Fraser predicted that the registry would cost 500 times as much as originally estimated -- that's $1 billion -- by 2005.

And even now, when it appears the $1 billion will be reached this year instead of next, and when the registry's annual operating budget is more than $100 million.

That money could have been used to hire more police officers and equipment to help police deal with serious problems like organized crime, drug trafficking, auto theft and child abuse.

Instead, it has gone to a program that appears not to have increased public safety one iota.

Even the police chief of Canada's largest city, Toronto's Julian Fantino, has expressed doubts about whether the registry would help him to combat gun crime: "The difficulty, of course, is that we haven't yet come across any situation where the gun registry would have enabled us to either prevent or solve any of these crimes."

To be sure, some police forces have expressed support for the registry, but the evidence weighs heavily against the supposition that it will improve public safety.

After all, those who are intent on committing crimes aren't about to register their guns. It's only the law-abiding citizens -- the weekend hunters or sport shooters -- who are likely to obey the law.

Further, Canada has maintained a registry of restricted firearms, including handguns, since 1930. And handguns, rather than hunting rifles, are the weapons of choice for serious criminals.

The other weapons of choice for criminals -- semi-automatics and submachineguns -- are typically obtained through smuggling rings and any criminal with even a modicum of intelligence isn't going to run to a government office to register them.

Moreover, 90 per cent of all violent crimes in Canada don't involve firearms and 80 per cent of firearm-related deaths are suicides. So there's no reason to believe the registry will improve public safety.

And there are few political reasons for Mr. Martin to keep the registry alive. Certainly, the new Conservative party and the NDP will rake the Liberals over the coals if the registry is scrapped, but then they'll do the same thing if Mr. Martin keeps it alive.

Although Mr. Martin was a part of the government that introduced the program, it was never really his idea -- it was the brainchild of Jean Chretien and Mr. Rock -- and he wasn't part of the government that kept it going. So the prime minister won't have to worry about critics who say he's breaking his promises.

In fact, Mr. Martin has said his administration will be very different from his predecessor's, and he's mandated that all federal programs be subject to a review to ensure they're cost-effective and necessary.

What better way to prove his sincerity than by scrapping a useless program?

In addition, since most provinces have spoken out against the registry -- B.C. Attorney-General Geoff Plant called the program an "unmitigated disaster" -- Mr. Martin is likely to get greater provincial support if he kills the registry now.

Further, since western Canadians and those in rural areas are most opposed to the registry, Mr. Martin can also expect greater support from the West -- something that's crucial given his commitment to reducing western alienation. And he needn't worry about losing votes in central Canada because the Liberals already enjoy overwhelming support in Ontario.

There is, therefore, little reason to keep the registry alive. And it appears the Martin administration is prepared to make some changes: Albina Guarnieri, a minister of state, is reviewing the program and is said to be planning major changes.

That's a good sign, as long as Ms. Guarnieri and Mr. Martin recognize the only change that makes fiscal and political sense is to finally put the registry out of its misery.