PUBLICATION:          Edmonton Journal

DATE:                         2004.01.11

EDITION:                    Final

SECTION:                  Opinion

PAGE:                         A12

SOURCE:                   The Edmonton Journal

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

Can Paul Martin stop the gun battle and win the West?

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

Prime Minister Paul Martin is caught in the crossfire over Canada's controversial firearms registry. It's clear he'll not find political safety for long by ducking behind vague promises of a review.

On one side is a majority of Western Canadians who are steadfastly opposed to the registry. They see it as a symbol of how Western opinions are ignored by Ottawa, as a colossal waste of taxpayers' money and as an assault on their individual rights.

The registry is a rallying point for feelings of western alienation and challenges Martin's commitment to give the region a greater say in how the country is run.

On the other side is a Canadian public acutely aware of violent crime and firearm safety, demanding some sort of gun control to make them feel more secure. Support for the registry is strongest in Ontario and Quebec -- traditional Liberal strongholds.

With an election looming and the cost of the registry expected to surpass $1 billion this year, Martin can't afford to dither.

The $1-billion cost is a far cry from the number tossed about when the registry was announced by the Chretien government in 1995. At that point, the program was projected to cost $85 million to set up and $20 million a year to run. Annual operating costs are now budgeted at $118 million.

The program, which took effect Dec. 1, 1998, required that all gun owners be licensed by Jan. 1, 2003, and that all firearms be registered by June 30, 2003. As of the deadline, 6.4 million firearms had been registered.

Unfortunately for those who favour more rather than less gun control -- and the matter is politically as much a rural-urban split as an regional one -- the spiralling costs of an imperfect registry have played into the hands of gun enthusiasts. They have been able to shift the focus of the debate away from the merits of registering rifles and shotguns, and make the matter a question of government waste -- a ground on which it is much easier to build consensus.

Clearly, Martin must seize control of the debate and refocus it on the rules surrounding weapon ownership.

As a former justice minister, Edmonton MP Anne McLellan bears some responsibility for the debacle. When she was appointed to the portfolio in charge of the firearms program in June 1997, less than $50 million had been spent on the registry.

By early 2002, when she left the portfolio in a cabinet shuffle, the registry's total cost was approaching $700 million and annual expenditures were running at $125 million a year.

After last month's cabinet shuffle, McLellan -- now public safety minister -- is back in charge of the firearms registry and this time looks as if she's prepared to do something. She has asked minister of state Albina Guarnieri to review the registry, with a view toward cutting costs and boosting compliance.

But by announcing the reviews, Ottawa also has raised expectations the days of the registry are numbered.

An Ipsos-Reid poll released in mid-December showed 55 per cent of Canadians believe the registry should be scrapped because it is badly organized, ineffective and too expensive. But the poll said a remarkable 43 per cent wish it to continue despite its problems -- and it made no attempt to determine how many registry opponents want a different mechanism for controlling shotgun and rifle ownership.

Opposition to the registry was highest in Alberta and British Columbia, at

67 per cent each, and in Saskatchewan/Manitoba, at 62 per cent.

An October poll done for Alliance MP Garry Breitkreuz -- the party's justice critic -- by Calgary pollster JMCK Polling reached similar conclusions. But JMCK went farther by asking Canadians if they would favour scrapping the federal registry and replacing it with provincial gun control programs. When given that option, 55 per cent said they were in favour and 34 per cent opposed.

Steve Patten, a University of Alberta political science professor, said leaving gun control to the provinces isn't an option because it would lead to varying levels of gun control across the country.

And while abandoning the registry would undoubtedly score political points for Martin in the West, he is unlikely to do so because it would be an admission of political failure and an absolute waste of the nearly $1 billion that has already been spent.

"The people who are strongly opposed to gun control aren't going to be voting Liberal anyway," said Patten. Instead, Martin hopes to win over the support of Canadians "who are somewhat against gun control and who are flabbergasted that something that was supposed to cost a few million (dollars) is now costing a billion."

There are no quick and easy answers to Martin's dilemma.

"There are upsides and downsides no matter which direction he heads. It's one of those issues where if he is aggressive in changes and tries to please anti-registry people, then he angers those who want gun control.

And although they're not as vocal, there are lots of Canadians who do," Patten said.

"They've got to do some radical reform, but maintain the appearance of being committed to the principle" of gun control.

Patten said the government is likely to make managerial changes at the registry and perhaps pare down the types of guns that must be recorded, dropping firearms such as hunting rifles.

In the end, however, Martin may discover there is no solution that will satisfy both schools of Canadian opinion on firearms after five years of polarizing debate.

He has his work cut out.