It won't end with killing the gun registry

I won't bother writing a long obituary on the coming death of the long gun registry; I've made all my arguments previously and the issues pro and con have been well-debated. I will say this, though: if you think the anti-gun control lobby is going to declare victory here and call it a day, you're sadly mistaken.

This is an important victory for them, and will only embolden to continue chipping away in favour of what they call "gun rights" in Canada, and what others call legitimate controls and restrictions on gun ownership.

What's next? While one of their frequent anti-registry arguments was "you already need a firearms license, so the registry is redundant" there are signs that, you guessed it, eliminating firearms licensing may be next on their hit list. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation seems in favour:

“The bill introduced today (Ending the Long-gun Registry Act) is long overdue,” said CTF Federal and Ontario Director Gregory Thomas. “Our supporters would have preferred that the government go further, and also eliminate licensing for non-restricted long-guns, but today’s legislation addresses the most wasteful and unnecessary parts of the program.”

And the editor of Outdoor Canada magazine is sounding the alarm about a growing anti-licensing movement:

Now that the Ending the Long-gun Registry Act, or Bill C-19, is before the House of Commons and all but certain to pass into law, should the shooting sports community take aim at also getting rid of non-restricted gun licences for individuals? The rumblings are out there, with the Canadian Taxpayers Federation making the most noise.

Emboldened by their victory on the gun registry, anti-gun control activists will be pushing the Conservatives to use their majority to weaken Canada's gun control systems, and bring it more into line with the much looser regimes we wee in the U.S. The NRA has already been spending in Canada. Gun control advocates will need to be vigilant and mobilize public opinion to beat back the coming next wave, whether it comes around licensing or other areas.

In related news, it seems the pro-gun lobby is increasingly less and less about hunting, farm protection and the rural way of life, an argument I can sympathize with, and more and more about young men wanting shiny bang bang toys they saw on video games:

The consumer tastes of Canadian gun owners are fast changing, as shooters eschew vintage hunting rifles in favour of the latest "tacti-cool" military-style weapons - many of which appear in movies and popular video games, such as Call of Duty.

As a new generation of young men become interested in shooting, but not hunting, retailers are trying to meet the growing demand for sleek firearms.

Canadian authorities, meanwhile, facing the repeal of the long-gun registry by the federal government, are worried about the trend.

Gun-lovers accuse them of trying to stall the sale of legal military technology to the public.

A worrying trend, and possibly the next front in the gun control battle as the pro-gun crowd try to remove restrictions on realistic military-style (by design) weapons that can too easily be converted to full automatic fire.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Conservative MP Larry Miller: Soft on crime?

Unable to change the law through democratic means, Conservative MP Larry Miller is urging the authorities to simply stop enforcing laws he doesn't agree with. Because that's how democracy works.

Conservative MP Larry Miller has suggested government officials should turn a blind eye to unregistered firearms if farmers are just using them to protect their livestock from coyotes.

The beef farmer-turned-federal politician made the remarks at a Saturday meeting in Elmwood, Ont., to discuss how to deal with the growing problem of coyotes preying on sheep and other farm animals in the area.

“(Farmers) are afraid to bring out their guns and travel around like they used to,” Miller (Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound) told the crowd, according to a report in the Owen Sound Sun Times published Monday. “What the (Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources) needs to do when it comes to unregistered guns and what have you, they’ve got to start turning their heads the same way they do with commercial fishermen that break the law . . . Let the farmers out there that have guns do a lot of this control.”

He stood by his defence of ignoring laws he doesn't like when contacted by the Toronto Star:

“There are a lot of guns that aren’t registered and urban people may not understand why, but it just goes to show you how ridiculous a law it is and until it’s scrapped, people in my part of the world and most rural parts of Canada are not going to be happy,” Miller said.

Actually Larry, you said we city folk don't understand, but maybe it would help if you tried to explain it to us, instead of just stomping your feet and saying its stupid. Because, particularly with the reforms that a Liberal government would make to the registry, I fail to see any compelling argument why farmers shouldn't need to register their guns. I support their right to have them, just take five minutes to register the dammed things.

In the mean time, counselling that laws he doesn't like shouldn't be enforced is an interesting position for a lawmaker to take. Any other laws we should feel free to ignore, Larry?

Anyway, I enjoyed how a Ministry of Natural Resources spokeswoman corrected three of Larry's misconceptions in one comment:

Ministry of Natural Resources spokeswoman Jolanta Kowalski said enforcing firearms registration is federal jurisdiction and noted there is no closed season on coyotes. Kowalski also said the ministry enforces the rules surrounding fishing.

Opps, sorry Larry.

P.S. I like Mark Holland, but his linking the Phoenix shootings in his comments was unnecesary, inappropriate and unfortunate.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

The long gun registry lives, at least for now

With last night's nail-biter vote on a Liberal motion to end the Conservative bid to kill the gun registry passing 153 to 151, you can now be returned to your previously scheduled program of baseless election speculation. The registry will live to be a political prop for all for another day or three. But first, a look back at the vote and the way forward.

THE POLICY

It's important to say that the most important thing is that the registry remains in place as a valuable tool that police forces across the country insist they need to do their jobs and that everyone from doctors and nurses to victim's groups believe is an important (and symbolic) part of a wider gun control regime.

It doesn't end here. The anti-registry forces have promised to try and try again. The pro-registry forces can't rest here either. Both the Liberals and the NDP have similar proposals to reform the registry. The Liberals have said they'll implement there's when in government; the NDP promise a private member's bill as soon as possible. I believe there is much common ground here. I'd like to see the Liberals and NDP get together on registry reform legislation and push it through this Parliament.These reforms are needed, there's no need to wait, and it would put rural NDP and Liberal MPs in a much better position next election to be able to point to a reformed registry. I hope both parties can at least temporarily put aside the politics to work together on this one.

And I agree with Ian Capstick's point on Power and Politics last night: the gun control lobby shouldn't stop here. They should move the debate to new ground, such as exploring selective weapons bans. The same polling registry opponents like to point to in support of scrapping it also show that 44 per cent of Canadians would support a complete hand gun ban (the same number are opposed.) An earlier poll showed 45 per cent of Canadians felt owning firearms should be illegal altogether. I wouldn't go that far, but there definitely is appetite for stricter gun control.

THE POLITICS

The Conservatives like to say they were going to be a winner either way. Of course, they always say this. Prorogation was still a magnificent victory for the Prime Minister's genius. Anyway, time will tell. Bottom line: they wanted to kill the registry, and they failed. They took their best shot last night, using a private member's bill to make it seem a pseudo free vote, and nearly moved enough NDP votes to take it. But the registry lives.

And I ask you, are these the faces of happy people?

They lost the battle, but they'll tell you it was a Pyhrric victory for the opposition and the war will still be their's. It's nearly entirely spin, but it's pretty good spin.

Certainly, the registry is useful to the Conservative Party as a fundraising tool. I have no doubt they wasted no time getting an e-mail solicitation out to the faithful after the vote, and I'm sure when this quarter's financials are in, it will show the faithful opened their wallets. The registry is also a useful way of keeping their rural base energized and onside: as long as it lives, they need to vote Conservative to get it killed. If it's gone, maybe another ballot issue comes up that changes the equation. And if they really wanted it killed, they'd put it on a money bill and make it a confidence matter. It's more useful as a wedge.

The party has their eye on potential pick-ups from Liberal and NDP pro-registry voters in rural Canada. As I've said before I'm doubtful they'll find gains; I think the registry has already been factored into rural voting patterns. If it's a ballot issue for you, you're probably voting Conservative already. You're nearly definitely not voting Liberal. Time will tell, of course, but I'd be surprised.

More interesting for me, and continually ignored by the so-called liberal media, is the impact for the Conservatives in urban Canada and Quebec, where the registry is popular. Many urban and Quebec MPs are offside from their constituents on this issue. And it's also in these registry-supportive areas where the Conservatives need gains to earn a majority.

Will the registry be a ballot issue in urban Canada and Quebec? It remains to be seen. It could be. Certainly, it hasn't been in the past, nor has it generated the raw emotion it has in rural Canada. Two things on that, though.

One, the registry is the status quo, it's accepted as a fait accompli in urban Canada, so there's been no need to get too worked up over it. And two, the Conservatives haven't elevated the issue before. Sure, it was in the platform. But it wasn't in the brochures and stump speeches of urban Conservative MPs and candidates, and in government Harper didn't show any eagerness to kill the registry until now. With Candice Hoepner's bill, the issue is now national news, and you can count on the opposition reminding urban and Quebec voters in the next campaign that the Conservatives very nearly killed the registry, and have promised to not rest until they succeed.

This could well become a ballot issue for those educated urban women that helped flip a number of urban ridings to Harper in the last election, and if it does it could mean Conservative trouble.

For the Liberals, there is risk but also potential for growth. Deciding to "whip the vote" was a risky gambit for Michael Ignatieff, but one worth making and a little less risky then it seems on the surface. Remember, months back the Liberal caucus came together, urban and rural, and hashed-out a compromise that they could all agree on, that balanced the legitimate concerns of rural Canadians while keeping the registry alive. With that compromise agreed to the caucus was united and onside. So was it really necessary to call a formal whip?

Perhaps not, but I'd argue it was still a good call. For one thing, it made clear the Liberal Party was united on the issue and it shifted the public and media pressure to the NDP. It ended months of possible "how will x, how will y" vote stories immediately. Liberal MPs could go right to work explaining the compromise position. And for a leader who has been criticized for a lack of strength, I think the show of "whipping" the vote even though the compromise was reached was useful to portray Ignatieff as a strong, decisive leader. You can also make an argument for the consensus-leadership approach that Jack Layton took on the issue, but Ignatieff and Layton have different leadership perceptions and challenges to overcome. Ignatieff had to show a firmer hand to the public than Layton did.

What will it mean electorally? Well, there certainly is risk in rural Canada, both for sitting Liberal MPs and for growth potential. But as I argued above, I think that the pool of voters for whom the registry is a ballot issue are lost to us no matter what we do on the issue. There were a lot of tight-margin ridings both ways last time. Could this issue move some votes there? Potentially. Enough to swing seats LPC to CPC? I'm doubtful. Remember, the LPC ran a very weak campaign last time and turned in one of its worst showings in history. I'll make a bold prediction: at worst, we'll suck slightly less next time. So I don't see enough Liberal vote being in play here to be difference-making.

What about urban Canada? Again, I think that's more interesting. I went over many of the reasons above why this could be troubling for the Conservatives in urban Canada and Quebec. I'd suspect the Liberals will put this issue front and centre in those ridings in the next election. There is the potential for pick-ups in a number of ridings across the country for the Liberals here. If there are rural loses they'd, at worse, be balanced by urban gains, with a net positive being more likely. It would have been a bigger mover had the Conservatives succeeded in killing the registry, but it could still be a ballot issue.

For the NDP, they're getting positive reviews for Layton's handling of the issue. My bias is obvious here and my awareness of that fact can't negate it (although I shall try), but I have to disagree with those positive reviews. I think he fumbled his way through this, and was lucky to pull it off. But in the end, I think he probably did the best he could with a bad situation.

And Layton did have a very difficult challenge here. His party was much more divided on this issue than the Liberals were. When the Liberals unified around their compromise position, the NDP was left without cover. Layton didn't want it to be NDP votes that killed the registry, but he has a large rural caucus that doesn't support the registry and feel their constituents don't either. Somehow, he had to bridge those two sides.

The compromise was there, and he found it. I was genuinely surprised that it took him as long as it did though. What followed seemed a strange kabuki play as a parade of NDP MPs came forward to change their votes on the issue. In the end, their least-vulnerable MPs took one for the team, and those most at risk were given cover and allowed to vote with the government. And I give full credit to all those that made the difficult decision to support the registry, and wrestled with this issue mightily.

Will Layton and the NDP get a bump from being seen as allowing this to be a free-vote, despite the intense lobbying behind the scenes? Perhaps. I think it would be negligible, though. I think the question, though, is can the NDP have their cake and eat it too on this one? Can they support the registry in the cities and oppose it in rural Canada at the same time? I think that's a tough sell that would hurt them on both sides. If they can successfully move reforms to bridge that urban-rural divide, however, it over-rides that problem.

Electorally, I don't see this hurting the NDP in rural Canada, particularly if the registry is reformed. Their most at-risk MPs voted to scrap, and the others have sufficient margins to overcome any blow-back on this issue. In urban Canada (and Quebec), if the registry had died with NDP rural votes they'd have been in serious trouble. Recent polling makes that abundantly clear. With the registry saved, I think they're probably fine. You could make an "you can't trust the NDP to support the registry when the chips are down" argument, but I don't think it would resonate.

For the BQ, nearly the entire Conservative caucus in Quebec is offside with their constituents on this issue, where the registry is very popular. With the BQ as the second-choice in most of those seats. you can be sure Gilles Duceppe will be reminding them of this next election.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Showdown at the parliamentary corral

If yesterday's theme in Ottawa was shashbuckling pirates, today it's westerns and cowboys. Because tonight at 1745 EST it's the show-down in the parliamentary corral, when the pro an anti-gun registry forces square-off. Don't vote until you see the whites of their eyes!

I think it will be a nail-biter. I'm told the Liberals will have all hands on deck. Apparently Newfoundland MP Scott Simms spent some extra time washing his hands or something this morning, wasn't at a group photo-op, and a flurry of speculative media coverage ensued. Were I Yukon MP Larry Bagnall, I'd walk by the press gallery coughing, clutching a bottle of cough syrup, just for the fun of watching the networks break into regular programming. Anyway, they'd better have all hands on deck, no excuses. The NDP don't want to flip one more MP than they think they have to (a risky gambit), so it's a very thin margin we're working with.

I won't rehash the arguments pro and con at this point. But I do want to reinforce a few things.

One, as I wrote last month when Angus Reid released its last poll on the gun registry, opposition to scrapping the registry is growing, and for scrapping it is declining. In the latest poll, 46 support scrapping, and 40 per cent oppose scrapping. Pro-scrapping is up two points from August but down five from last November. But opposition to scrapping it is up five points from last month and six points from last year.

As they learn more, the undecideds are breaking to the don't scrap side. Keep this issue in the spotlight and that trend will continue, and the air will come out of the scrap the registry balloon. People are increasingly siding with the police, the doctors and nurses, the victims of crime, and the growing chorus in favour of the registry.

Two, the media still persist in the laughable assertion that no matter what Stephen Harper does on this issue he'll win, because he's super-awesome. And vice-versa for the Liberals. I wonder how they can seriously write this nonsense.

First of all, the gun registry is Harper's majority killer. It's poison for him in Quebec (better build arenas for everyone), and in cities, particularly with urban women. There's no way he can make up enough seats in rural Canada to both a) compensate for held seats endangered by this issue, and b) add the numbers he needs for a majority. The math isn't even close. There's a reason why he hasn't pushed this issue until now. You can bet that whatever happens tonight, the Liberals will make the registry an issue in urban and Quebec races, particularly in held ridings. Peter Kent in Thornhill, Alice Wong in Richmond, Andrew Sexton in North Vancouver ... the list is long of urban Conservative MPs offside with their constituents on this issue.

And secondly, as I've argued before I'm doubtful the Liberals will take much of a hit in rural Canada on this. By and large, most of those opposed to the registry enough to make it a ballot issue aren't voting Liberal anyway. So it's factored-in. Those who see the registry as a conspiracy toward a police state will forever be lost to us. And for those with legitimate serious issues about the registry, the proposed Liberal changes are a reasonable compromise that address most of their concerns. I see a net positive for the Liberals on this issue with the way they've played it.

Three, while the media have focused on Liberal and NDP MPs they've refused to challenge the long list of Conservative MPs who represent areas (urban Canada, Quebec) where support for keeping the registry is very high. Why aren't they too expected to vote the will of their constituents, as Candice Hoeppner insists the opposition MPs should? Have they been privately whipped or pressured? Questions that the gallery hasn't bothered to ask.

Anyway, if there's one thing we can all agree on, I think, it's that there are far more important matters of state our parliamentarians should be focused on at the moment. So let's kill this bid to quash the registry tonight, and move on to more important things.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Help unravel the mystery with Professor Layton!

This showed-up in my inbox the other day from Nintendo in a case of interesting timing, given current events. I found it amusing, and surely ripe for parody by someone with graphic design skills...

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Layton sucks and blows on registry, but with pizazz

Follow the bouncing-ball. Jack Layton had a press conference on the gun registry today where he confirmed he can’t get his rural MPs to support what has long been NDP party policy and support the gun registry.

He doesn’t want to whip his caucus, because it seems likely some of them wouldn’t fall into line if he tried. I know the NDP insists its long-held principle they don’t whip private members bills (PMB), but in fact we all know this is only a Conservative government bill masquerading as a PMB to exploit that fact. As an aside, one wonders just what trickery the Conservatives could push through this loophole if they wanted to.

Still, Jack doesn’t want to be seen as doing nothing while his MPs kill the gun registry. So today he proposed a private member’s bill that would reform the registry. Coincidentally, his reforms are pretty much the same as the reforms proposed by the Liberals in April, reforms the NDP and its surrogates have been spending the last four months attacking as insufficient. The one notable difference is that the Liberals would enact the reforms when in government while voting to keep the registry now, while the NDP would introduce a private members bill as soon as it can this fall. Their hope is the reforms will convince their rural MPs to vote for the registry.

Sounds great, right? Sure. I liked these reforms when the Liberals proposed them in April, so I still like them now. I’m quite surprised it has taken the NDP this long to try to find a compromise, with an 11th-hour desperation play. While it’d be nice if Jack had said “great ideas Michael, now let’s take them one step further” instead of throwing bricks, I’m a glass half-full kinda guy.

But there’s just one thing: the vote to kill the registry will come well before Layton could possibly see his bill in the house. Layton’s answer to that?

Mr. Layton was pressed by reporters on how he expects this bill to become a reality, when Ms. Hoeppner’s bill is lined up for a vote so soon after Parliament resumes. He suggested that if all parties come onside, they could use the bill as a basis to reach a solution — presumably meaning that Ms. Hoeppner’s bill would either be amended or would die.

“There’s no good reason why we shouldn’t be able to sit down with goodwill and open minds. There’s no good reason why we shouldn’t be able to build solutions that bring us together.”

Now I’m certainly no government spokesperson. I’ll leave that dubious honour to Dimitri Soudas. But if Layton is seriously expecting the Conservatives to agree to kill the Hoeppner bill and get onboard with reforms to the registry they rejected when proposed by the Liberals in April, I expect they won’t find the government’s response to be favourable. They might even tell Layton “it’s our party’s policy not to interfere with private members bills” with a little smile. If the NDP is counting on Conservative help here, they’re dreaming.

Which means the vote to kill the registry will come long before a hypothetical NDP private members bill reforming it could ever see the light of day. And needless to say, if the registry is killed any bill to reform it dies as well.

So, that means NDP MPs will be faced with a choice, the same choice they’ve had all along: do they vote to kill the registry next month, or do they vote to keep it based on the promise of future reforms, either by a private member’s bill or by a new government.

For the Liberal caucus, it’s the latter. The choice has been made. Their leader, Michael Igntieff, has convinced them to support keeping the registry now by promising specific reforms by a future Liberal government.

Now it’s up to Layton to convince his caucus to do the same. He made an interesting comment here:

Mr. Layton was also critical of Mr. Ignatieff, who last April proposed many of the compromises that the NDP is now suggesting. The difference, said Mr. Layton, is that Ignatieff is saying he would make the conciliatory changes to the registry if the Liberals win the next election.

“But Liberal MPs are parliamentarians now,” said Mr. Layton. “Not parliamentarians in waiting. They need to act now.”

Yes Jack, and the vote on killing the registry will come first, and your MPs are parliamentarians now too. And you're not a leader-in-waiting either. So the question still remains: can you convince your MPs to accept a compromise or not? And if you can’t, will you whip them or will you let your MPs kill the registry?

This is a test of leadership Jack and, to paraphrase yourself, you need to act now.

UPDATE: Now with video, where the media openly laugh at Layton's feeble rationalizations. I hope his caucus takes him more seriously.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

You can’t have an urban/rural divide without urban

With the latest vote on the gun registry approaching, and its fate still very much up in the air, I’ve been reading much about the urban/rural divide. Except the punditry seems to think you can have a divide with only one side. They’re nearly uniformly ignoring the urban side of the equation.

A good example of this myopic reporting came the other day from the Globe’s John Ibbitson:

The Conservatives happily exploit that divide, in the North and elsewhere. The Liberals and NDP can only suffer.

Apparently in John’s world, the Conservatives can only benefit, no matter what they do. And if my grandmother had wheels, John, she’d be a wagon.

In fact, killing the registry would very much hurt Conservative chances in urban Canada. And the NDP's, since if the registry dies it will have been with the NDP’s assistance. And since it’s in urban Canada and Quebec where the Conservatives can and must gain seats to keep government or form a majority, there Conservatives could pay a steep price.

Let’s say the Conservative attempt to kill the registry fails. This would actually be the best-case scenario for the Harper government. They can tell their rural base they tried their best and raise a bunch of money off it while keeping their support, and in urban Canada since the registry lives, its status-quo. There might be some blowback for Liberal rural MPs, but by and large those for whom killing the registry is a ballot box issue aren’t voting Liberal anyways and the party's proposed reforms are sensible.

Now, let’s say the Conservatives with NDP assistance succeed in killing the gun registry. Their rural supporters are pleased with them, and will keep on supporting them. It’s hard to see Liberal rural MPs who voted to keep it being hurt because the registry will be gone, with it removed as a ballot issue rural voters will turn to other issues. Status quo in rural Canada.

In urban Canada, though, it would be a very different story. Right now, the registry hasn’t been a ballot issue in urban Canada because it’s the status quo, it’s in place and Harper wasn’t making a lot of noise about killing it. So urban voters, particularly women, allowed themselves to be wooed by sweater-vest Steve and targeted moderate policies, such as EI reforms around maternal and parental leaves. Combined with a very effective ethnic outreach program, a number of urban seats swung Conservative in the last election and many more were competitive.

Kill the registry though, and all of a sudden it becomes a ballot box issue in urban Canada. It becomes about gun control and crime, and suddenly the Conservatives find themselves on the wrong side of a soft on crime wedge. And it won’t take that many votes to swing a number of Conservative urban ridings. Not only that, they can say good-bye to adding the seats they need to grow. (Particularly as they abandon their ethnic outreach strategy in favour of more pandering to their base.)

As for the NDP, while their urban MPs will have voted to keep the registry, with their party having allowed it to be killed they will also be hit with the anger over its death. This will mean pressure for people like Paul Dewar in Ottawa, for their Vancouver area MPs, and even for Jack and Olivia in Toronto. And it may well be death for Thomas Mulcair in Outremont.

We’re reading much from the media about the pressure rural Liberal and NDP MPs are under. What has been completely absent is the same scrutiny of Conservative MPs that represent urban and Quebec ridings. Can Alice Wong really claim she’s voting freely the wishes of the people of Richmond? Can James Moore in Port Coquitlam? Andrew Saxton in North Vancouver? How about Peter Kent in Thornhill, or John Baird and Pierre Poilievre in Ottawa? How about Keith Ashfield in Fredericton?

And those are just a few.

In fact, there are nearly 30 Conservative-held ridings that are suburban or urban-enough (or in Quebec enough) that you’d have to ponder if their constituents really support the government’s supposedly free but surprisingly uniform opposition to the registry.

It would be interesting to hear the answers, if John Ibbitson and his colleagues could be bothered to ask.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Canadian views are hardening on gun control, & away from the Conservative line

Angus Reid released survey data today with a lot of questions on gun control and gun registry-related issues. I’m sure you’ll hear many of the usual c/Conservative suspects grab a few of the figures to support their talking-points. Indeed, they already are. But looking more closely at the numbers, and more importantly at the trend lines, show some interesting findings they’ll chose to ignore.

They don’t provide the trendlines directly, but if you pull-up the last gun study Angus Reid did in 2009 and compare the findings (the bulk of the questions are identical) some very interesting trends emerge showing the views of Canadians are trending toward greater measures on gun control. You also see some of the funny inherent contradictions that come with public opinion measurement.

For example, Canadians by and large agree gun violence is becoming less of a serious problem. Just 28 per cent called it serious, down by six points, while 42 per cent called it moderately serious, down by four points. Some 23 per cent said it was not too serious, a rise of eight points.

You’d think with that trend, people wouldn’t favour stricter gun control measures. But they do. When asked if they’d favour a complete ban on handguns in Canada, nearly half, 49 per cent, said yes it would be justified, while 39 per cent said it would not be justified. Again, besides the near majority, the interesting thing here is the trends: support for a ban was up three points, and more strikingly opposition to a handgun ban was down by seven points.

Which brings us to the infamous gun registry. One question you’re seeing be latched-onto is if the registry has been successful or not fighting crime. Just 13 per cent said it was (up two) while 43 per cent said it wasn’t (down four) and 20 per cent said it had no effect (down three). Those are interesting results, particularly when compared to the complete ban results. Do they mean many want the government to go further because the registry hasn’t been effective enough, or scrap it all together because it’s ineffective? Probably both, but it’s impossible to say with the available data.

On support/oppose scrapping the long gun registry, the figure you’ll hear most is that 44 per cent support scrapping it, while 35 per cent oppose it. That those numbers aren’t more wide given the opinion on its effectiveness shows that some simply want a more effective registry. And again, here, the trend is telling. Support for scrapping the registry has dropped by seven points since last November, while opposition is up by one point. Which means some former registry opponents are on the fence, and support for scrapping the registry is on the decline.

Finally, going further than just a handgun ban, Angus Reid also asked if it should be legal or illegal for ordinary Canadians to own firearms all together. In a reversal from last year, a plurality of Canadian (45 per cent) said it should be illegal, and 40 per cent said it should stay legal. Illegal was up by six points, while keep it legal declined by seven.

So, look at the numbers and the trends in totality and what can we take away? Canadians are increasingly favouring stricter gun control, not looser. Support for scrapping the registry is declining, and support shouldn’t be taken as a condemnation of gun control.

Finally, a few things are often overlooked by the pundits and the media around this issue. They paint it as a rural/urban thing, which is fair enough. But while they spend much time on how this could impact rural voting, they ignore how it could impact urban voting. We have the registry now, and I’d argue this issue has largely been factored into rural voting patterns. Urban, though, is a different story. How many swing urban soccer mom votes who have gone Conservative during Harper’s sweater vest era (and moved seats) would flip if he succeeds in killing the registry and is seen as soft on gun control? Those are swing seats at risk, while the votes they’d gain are in rural ridings they probably already hold.

Also, look at the regionals and you’ll see opinions in Quebec are quite staunchly anti-gun. Some 76 per cent of Quebecers view gun violence as very or moderately serious, 54 per cent support a handgun ban, 54 per cent would make gun ownership illegal, and 51 per cent oppose scrapping the gun registry.

A: Urban Canada. Quebec.

Q: What are two places the Conservatives can’t afford to lose support if they’re going to ever get a majority?

Were I an NDPer representing a riding like Outremont I’d be a little concerned here too.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Maurizio Bevilacqua expected to resign today

My sources in the city formerly known as the city above Toronto tell me that Liberal Maurizio Bevilacqua is expected to step-down today as the Member of Parliament for Vaughan, in advance of one of the worst-kept secrets of local municipal politics: his intention to run for Mayor of Vaughan.

While Bevilacqua may declare for mayor immediately, it's expected he'll wait until next week to formally launch his campaign.

This has been in the works for some time, but his hand may have been tipped by a Toronto Star story yesterday that reported on what has been common knowledge in Vaughan for some time: Bevilacqua has been using his MP office budget to paper the riding with mailings about his achievements (and, during the world cup, his love of soccer) in advance of his mayoral bid. Interestingly, the Star story seems to have been pulled, although the link is still active.

Anyway, while Bevilacqua is expected to be a favourite in the mayoral race against embattled incumbent Linda Jackson, his departure also sets-up some interesting scenarios on the federal level.

For one, will there be a fierce race for the Liberal nomination in this attractive riding, or will the leader take the opportunity for an appointment?

For two, what will Bevilacqua's departure do for the math around the upcoming gun registry vote in a few weeks?

And for three, when will Stephen Harper call the by-election? He's expected to call a number of others shortly, with the statutory clock ticking. Will he throw Vaughan in too, or will he hold off calling it to keep the Liberals potentially down a seat for a longer period?

Time will tell.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Jack Layton and Darrel Dexter extended caption contest

NDP leader Jack Layton shares a laugh today with Nova Scotia's NDP Premier, Darrell Dexter today at the Nova Scotia NDP's annual convention. Now here's a photo that needs a caption. My extended contribution is below, feel free to leave yours in the comments...

Darrell: Jack, I know that you've been in a righteous lather over the HST in BC and Ontario. You're not going to give me a hard time for jacking-up the HST by two points, are you?

Jack: Of course not, Darrell, you're my boy! You're my boy! We'll just ignore the fact that Nova Scotia now has both an NDP government AND the highest HST in Canada, and hope no one notices our hypocrisy.

Darrell: Awesome, you da man, Jack! Say, by the way, are you going to let your caucus vote to kill the gun registry or what?

Jack: Gotta go my man. Solidarity!

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

(Video) What we need is bullet control

And on the lighter side, maybe Chris Rock had it right after all..

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Adult conversation on the gun registry?

On the eve of the vote on second reading to end the long-gun registry that will be a free vote for Liberal and NDP MPs, Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff is sending signals he’ll propose policy that would seek to continue the registry while trying to address the concerns of rural Canadians, and indeed, rural Liberals:

Ignatieff said his caucus supports the "principle of gun control," and he personally believes it should include long guns. But he said the issue has divided urban and rural Canadians, and faces "resistance" in rural Canada.

He said his caucus is working on proposals to bridge that gap. In French, he suggested it could include "decriminalizing" the registration system for long guns.

It was a Liberal government that enacted the legal requirements to register firearms, including long-barrelled hunting rifles or shotguns, under the Criminal Code of Canada. The federal Conservatives have brought in successive "amnesties" since 2006 that were meant to encourage compliance by otherwise law-abiding and licensed long-gun owners.

"The fundamental issue is to make sure we get a system of gun control which works both for rural Canada and for urban Canada," Ignatieff said.

"We want to listen to victims groups, sports hunters, legitimate gun owners to find a way to rebuild legitimacy for the gun registry in rural Canada. That's not a thing you can do overnight."

Ignatieff said changes would start with a "simple principle: we are for a firearms registration system that includes all firearms, but there is a problem of resistance in rural areas. It could be possible to decriminalize but to maintain a firearms registration system for long guns."

Interesting. For those Liberals who have been saying it’s time for Ignatieff to have adult conversations with Canadians, here’s a litmus-test for ourselves: can we have an adult conversation on this issue within our own party?

For too long we’ve been playing politics on this issue too, pandering to our urban base while ignoring the rural perspective. Part of the problem has been we haven’t had rural voices at the policy-making table to add perspective. And part of the problem was the calculus was made better to secure the urban even if it means punting the rural.

Whatever happens with the private member’s bill, it appears we’re going to get a chance here within Liberal-land to try this one again, to try to find common policy ground on gun control that can address the concerns of both urban and rural Liberals. The question is, will it be actual debate? Online thus far, the tone has been largely support the registry no matter what or you’re a bad Liberal and a bad person. That reeks of the arrogance the Conservatives always accuse Liberals of having, and it’s insulting to the rural Liberals who have every right to their view.

This issue isn’t a make or break for rural Liberals by a long-shot, at least not for me. But it is symbolic. If you send the message that their views aren’t welcome, that there won’t be actual debate, that the urban way will always carry the day, then you’re just reaffirming the Conservative talking point about this being a Toronto party. Is that really what we want to do?

So can we put ideology aside to accept that each side has legitimate concerns, and try to find common ground? I hope so. Because if Liberals can’t even have adult conversations with ourselves, we’ll never be able to have them with Canadians.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Vote your conscience on the gun registry

While this may surprise some of my more jaded readers, I do generally try to maintain a certain degree of ideological and logical consistency in my opinions and writings. And I’ve been having a hard time squaring that on the gun registry issue.

It’s not a deeply-held or hot-button issue for me, but were I to be asked to cast a ballot I would vote to repeal the registry on long-guns, keeping it in place for hand guns and assault rifles. All of our opinions are coloured by our environment and experiences, and my view on this issue is influenced by my upbringing in rural, or at least non-urban Canada, where rifles are viewed and used much differently than in urban Canada. I just don’t think it’s necessary for long-guns.

We’ve debated the registry in this space before; I won’t rehash all the arguments pro and con.

What I do want to say is that there are very good arguments to be made on either side and it’s not a black and white issue, at least for me, but I find it very disappointing that its seemingly impossible to debate this issue without it degenerating into hyperbole, name-calling and insults.

The Conservatives, of course have no interest in a debate on the merits. This is just politics and positioning for them, not policy, but that’s nothing new. Within our own camp though, I see many urban Liberals quick to demonize and dismiss those with another perspective, not willing to even consider their views. You’re with them or you’re wrong, and you’re bad for being wrong, seems to be the view.

That’s unfortunate, and it speaks not only to the urban/rural divide that our party still struggles with, but to a deeper cultural and attitudinal divide that will make it even tougher to bridge those worlds. Because make no mistake, opposition to the gun registry may be a minority of caucus, but it is a substantially-held view in our membership and supporter-base across the country and callously dismissing their views as unwelcome, unworthy and stupid is arrogant and far from helpful.

Let the debate on this issue happen on its merits, let MPs vote their conscious and the will of their constituents, and let the chips fall where they may.

Back to ideological consistency though. I’ve had a hard time squaring my views on the registry with my views on same-sex marriage rights. It’s a similar ideological issue for many Liberals, and I’ve been of the view that this is a rights issue that speaks to the core values of Liberalism, and if you’re not going to support such a core issue you may be in the wrong party.

So my logical consistency radar buzzed here when I argue for free debate on the registry but draw a line on SSM. How do I square it? Well, I can argue that there’s a rights and freedom issue, on both issues I’m arguing for greater rights. I could argue SSM is a more fundamental issues, but for many the registry is just as fundamental.

So I guess I’ll have to live with the inconsistency, if just this once.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Conservatives expanding the gun registry, but it still totally sucks, promise

If you're one of those value for money people, or an ideological conservative, you really want to wonder about the news the Conservative are poised to spend millions expanding the gun registry processing centre Miramichi, New Brunswick:

You always hear rumours the gun registry is to be closed down, but how often do you hear it's going to actually get bigger?

But growth may be in store for the registry, said a spokesman for the RCMP last week.

"At this time, the anticipated in-service date for the new accommodation is summer 2011," RCMP Sgt. Greg Cox said by e-mail from Ottawa.

Cox said the RCMP is in talks with Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) to arrange appropriate space for the gun registry, and are awaiting approval for such a project. He hoped it would come in the fall of this year, after which it will be easier to tell how things will go from there, including when tenders will be issued.

They're not adding staff, but apparently the current space is to smaller, so they need a bigger one.

For ideological conservatives, the annoyance is that the Conservatives since first elected three years ago have failed to take any meaningful, serious action to attempt to abolish the gun registry, despite such a policy having been a core policy principle for years. Indeed, they're pumping more money into it.

Second, for those who just favour sensible fiscal management, its puzzling as well. While the Conservatives have promised not one job will be cut from the Mirimachi centre and they're investing tax dollars in its expansion, at the same time they've been continually taking steps to weaken the effectiveness and viability of the registry by issuing amnesties so owners don't need to register their rifles and shotguns. Does it really make sense to be spending more money on a program you're actively working to undermine and supposedly desperate to kill?

Assume they do eventually kill the registry for rifles and shotguns, leaving it for just handguns and what not. If they were serious about doing that, why expand the centre when the bulk of its workload would then be taken away?

Statistics from the Canadian Firearms Program's most recent report, however, shows that the long-gun registry makes up the vast majority of guns registered across the country and, therefore, the bulk of the work for Miramichi employees.

The figures show that of the 7,313,247 firearms registered across Canada as of December 2008, 6,652,208 are of the non-restricted or, long-gun variety, which includes hunting rifles and unmodified shotguns.

With restricted and prohibited firearms, meanwhile -- including handguns, semi-automatic and automatic weapons -- only about 660,000 are registered nationally.

They really seem to want to hold onto Tilly O'Neill-Gordon's seat.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

More pretend Conservative action on the gun registry

I'm down in Orlando covering EMC World for my day job so my blogging will likely be limited over the next few days. I did want to mention though that once again the Conservatives seem to be trying to placate their base by pretending to take action on the infamous gun registry while in reality continuing to do nothing serious to get rid of it, just as they have for years. Once wonders if their base is really this gullible.

Here's the latest, from the story the other day about their again extending the amnesty for long-gun owners that haven't registered yet.

Treasury Board President Vic Toews said the Conservatives still intend to do away with the registry the Liberals created, which he argues does nothing to reduce gun crime.

"The government believes that gun control should target criminals, not law-abiding citizens," Toews said in Winnipeg. "It should save lives, not waste money. And it should promote safety on our streets, not frustrate hunters in the bush or farmers on their land."

(snip)

The Tories moved toward dismantling the registry Friday in Ottawa when Portage-Lisgar MP Candice Hoeppner introduced a private member's bill that would abolish the requirement for Canadians to register their non-restricted firearms.

"It's a clear bill that would eliminate the long-gun registry," Hoeppner said. "I'm really hoping to build consensus and bring the opposition on board. We're a minority Parliament. We can't do it on our own."

Come on Vic, are you really serious here? We've been down this road before, now haven't we? And another private members bill? Gary Berkuitz has had one going for years that hasn't gone anywhere. If Vic were really serious, he'd introduce a government bill rather than offering support for a bill from an obscure backbencher.

In their last big pretend splash on the gun registry, the Conservatives did introduce a government bill ... in the Senate. That house of unelected unaccountables they so routinely mock. And then to no one's surprise, after the initial media flurry passed you announced the Senate bill was dead in the water, to no one's surprise and after no real effort on your part.

Frankly, the Conservatives have yet to convince me they want to do anything more than half-hearted pandering on this issue. They've yet to make a real, serious push on what supposedly is a deeply philosophical issue for them.

I think that's for two reasons. One: they don't want to do too much to piss off the urban women they need to grow their seat count, and nearly won over last election. Two: they like having the gun registry issue as a political stick, a fundraising tool, a rallying cry, falsely blaming those dammed Liberals for their inaction on the issue.

If they were serious, we'd see a government-sponsored bill narrowly focused on long guns, and we'd see a real, genuine effort at building support for it by the CPC from members of the Liberal and NDP caucus. That could be an interesting vote, if they handled it right. But they'd rather have the issue, so we get half-hearted private members bills and lots of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Cons to gun owners: We can't be bothered to even pretend to care

Gee, usually it takes a little longer for Conservative bluster to be exposed as completely empty, meaningless and contrived:

The Conservative government appears to be acknowledging its attempt to kill the long-gun registry is a lost cause.

Despite introducing an unusual Senate bill to great fanfare earlier this month, an official in the office of government Senate Leader Marjorie LeBreton says there's no timetable for a vote on Bill S-5 in the Liberal-dominated upper chamber.

And Liberals say the whole point of the exercise was political posturing rather than serious legislative change.

"The Liberals are opposed to it, so it's unlikely to move very much right now," Eli Schuster, LeBreton's communications adviser, said Monday when asked about the status of S-5.

Asked why the government would introduce a bill it had no intention of pushing to a vote, Schuster abruptly ended the conversation.

It's really quite amusing. I mean, of course this thing was a farce from the start. The Conservatives have had years to take meaningful action on the gun registry. But they couldn't be bothered. Always some excuse or another. It's a minority, they'd say. Shhh, we're trying to appeal to urban soccer moms, they'd whisper.

Then they decided to pretend to care last month, after Conservative MP Garry Breitkreuz took fire for agreeing to speak at an event with a Beretta semi-automatic handgun as a raffle prize. They pulled Breitkreuz from that event but had Harper speak at another giving away a rifle, drawing a distinction probably lost on many folk and unappreciated by their base. But as a sop, they promised to introduce legislation finally ending the gun registry ... in the unelected, undemocratic Senate. While, at the same time, promising every job at the gun registry processing centre in a Conservative-held riding is absolutely safe.

Now they're back to saying, sorry, too hard, nothing we can do on that gun registry thing. Apparently, they've just discovered the Liberals are opposed to it. Gee, I thought Liberal researchers dropped the ball when we didn't read the whole budget. Conservative researchers could have found this one out by checking Google.

I loved this line in the story:

Asked why the government would introduce a bill it had no intention of pushing to a vote, Schuster abruptly ended the conversation.

Indeed. Really, though, a good comms person, instead of running away arms flailing wildly, would have retorted "because Michael Ignatieff wants to implement a secret puppy tax" or something like that. They must really be rattled.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Conservatives talking out of both sides of their mouths on gun control

While the Conservatives insist they’re totally serious about killing the gun registry, despite introducing the bill to do so in the undemocratic, unelected, illegitimate Senate, they’re also insisting killing the registry won’t mean a single job loss for the central processing facility for the registry in Miramichi, New Brunswick:

(Conservative MP Tilly) O'Neill-Gordon said that as the frontline processing site for the Canadian Firearms Program, she's been told that there's much more that goes on behind the tinted windows of the heavily-secured building than simple long-gun registration.

"I have been assured by our prime minister that there will be no loss of jobs, and I have also spoken to the CEO at the gun registry, and he felt there was enough work to keep everybody there," she said.

Despite wanting to kill the registry (although not really trying that hard to do so since getting elected), the Conservatives are very keen on protecting those 200 gun registry jobs in Miramichi, and it’s all about politics. O'Neill-Gordon unseated long-time Liberal MP Charles Hubbard in the last election by just 1450 votes. It was a rare Conservative pick-up in the region, and recent polling shows the Conservatives in deep trouble in Atlantic Canada. The loss of those jobs would likely seal O'Neill-Gordon’s fate in the next election.

Unfortunately though, it would appear her rationale for keeping a gun registry processing centre open after killing the gun registry holds little water:

Statistics from the Canadian Firearms Program's most recent report, however, shows that the long-gun registry makes up the vast majority of guns registered across the country and, therefore, the bulk of the work for Miramichi employees.

The figures show that of the 7,313,247 firearms registered across Canada as of December 2008, 6,652,208 are of the non-restricted or, long-gun variety, which includes hunting rifles and unmodified shotguns.

With restricted and prohibited firearms, meanwhile -- including handguns, semi-automatic and automatic weapons -- only about 660,000 are registered nationally.

What else do they do at the processing centre, anyways? Bizarrely, it seems to be a secret…

…she's been told that there's much more that goes on behind the tinted windows of the heavily-secured building than simple long-gun registration…

The rookie MP was one of only a select few who have been given a tour of the centre, and she said it's an impressive operation.

Odd.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Hello, Conservative base? It's me, Stephen

Last week, Stephen Harper hinted a debate would soon begin on scrapping the gun registry. More developments today on the re-connecting with a Conservative base annoyed with all the crazy spending front:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper will give the keynote address at the 81st annual general meeting of the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters next month.

The conference of the Peterborough-based federation will be held in Mississauga, Ont., from March 19 to 21.

Harper will deliver his remarks on the conference's final day.

The conference includes speakers on a number of topics including the moose program review, hydro power and the demographics of anglers and hunters.

Oh, and speaking of the gun registry (h/t Warren):

On Monday February 9th an elated Greg Rickford, MP for Kenora, stood proudly in the House of Commons to support Saskatchewan M.P. Garry Breitkreuz as he introduced a Private Members’ Bill to scrap the decade-old Canadian long-gun registry -- Bill C-301. “Gary has been working on this issue for a long time and I’m very pleased to see he is getting the chance see it through and get the long-gun registry dismantled once and for all.” Mr. Breitkreuz is near the top of the list for introducing a Private Members’ Bill which is typically difficult to pass through the house. “This Private Members’ Bill is special and may be different” said a hopeful Rickford.

Elated, that's cute. Interesting though that this isn't a government bill. Rather, it's a private member's bill sponsored by a backbench MP. Which has to make one question the Harper government's seriousness on the issue. It seems to my biased eyes like the Conservatives are making a rather half-assed attempt to assuage their base. Action if necessary, but not necessarily action.

The Conservatives have made no effort in three years to scrap or seriously modify the gun registry, despite it being supposedly an important party policy. Now, with their base upset over the budget, we get some vague promises of a future debate from Harper and a private member's bill from a backbench MP.

Will this half-hearted action mollify anyone in their party? I can't say but if I were them, I'd be asking why not a government bill? Are you serious or not? Maybe a more serious push will come. We'll see. But in the mean time, it seems like the Conservative strategy is more likely to just piss everyone off: their base will be annoyed with a lack of seriousness, and the left will be annoyed with an attack on gun control.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Conservatives to revive gun registry debate?

While they vehemently campaigned against the gun registry in opposition, in government the Conservatives have done nothing to attempt to eliminate it. Hints now that may be about to change (from CP):

Harper told reporters during a whirlwind visit to Miramichi that local gun registry jobs are safe, despite his goal of eliminating the program.

More than 200 people work at the Miramichi firearms registry where the main processing centre is located.

Harper said a debate on the registry will happen in the near future, but jobs will not be lost.

``The Conservative party for a long time now has been committed to the abolition of the long gun registry, we are very clear about that,'' Harper said while visiting a hockey rink.

Can't find the CP coverage online yet, but the CBC has a report on the event that makes the plan to revive the debate seem more hypothetical.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

The long gun registry should be scrapped

I don't know if he'll take flack in his own party, but given that the NDP certainly has other MPs that represent rural constituencies, I'm pretty sure he's not the only one in his party or his caucus to hold this view. And it's a view I share, as do many Liberal from rural ridings, including, I'm sure, inside caucus. Hand-gun registry absolutely, but the long-gun registry makes no sense and should be scrapped:

A New Democrat member of Parliament is taking aim at Canada's long-gun registration program.

Northwestern Ontario MP John Rafferty wants the program scrapped.

He says he intends to introduce a private member's bill to that end when the House of Commons resumes sitting.

Rafferty says the money that goes to the program now would be better spent on police enforcement initiatives.

He admits many in his own party have different views, but says he is following the wishes of his constituents in his predominantly rural riding of Thunder Bay-River River.

Other MPs have introduced similar bills in the past, only to see them go nowhere.

I strongly support gun control. But long guns, aka rifles, are another kettle of fish. This really is an urban/rural thing. And for the Liberal Party, it's kind of a chicken or the egg thing. We have trouble electing rural MPs because of our policies on issues like this. And we get our policies on issues like this wrong because we don't have the perspective of rural MPs at the caucus table. A tough circle to square.

I went into greater depth on the issue a few years ago.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers