Inside Politics

Then again, the Liberals once seemed pretty keen on the gun registry, too.

by Kady O'Malley Posted: November 6, 2009 10:21 AM Last Updated: November 6, 2009 12:04 PM

Fair is fair; if we're -- by which I mean I, of course -- are ready to dredge up the ghosts of Conservative platforms past to harangue the government, we must be willing to do the same when certain former Liberal solicitor generals vote in favour of radically revamping a gun registry for which they were, at one point, ministerially responsible for maintaining. 

As a bureau colleague pointed out this morning. there's no record of Wayne Easter fretting about the prospect of "making criminals out of farmers and hunters" during his tenure as Solicitor General -- in fact, he spent much of his time defending the registry against charges that it was wildly overpriced and woefully ineffective, most of which originated with members and supporters of the predecessor of the party now in government .


In fact, as recently as last week, Easter told the Hill Times that he still hadn't decided how he was going to vote on the Hoeppner bill, although he insisted - and, in fact, still maintains -  that the last minute ad campaign that the Conservatives launched against him would have no effect on his vote. 

"The whole purpose of the Conservatives in this issue is to try and use it as a wedge issue to, in effect, not deal with the problem and not put the issue behind us, but to continue to play games," he complained to the Hill Times. "This is what it's all about with Stephen Harper it's all about the message and never about the results," 

On Wednesday night, he voted in favour of sending the Hoeppner bill to committee. Given his apparent conversion from registry supporter to opponent, perhaps the committee should consider calling him as a witness to testify about exactly why -- and when --  he changed his mind.

Then there's the Liberal who wasn't even a Liberal at the time that the registry was created, but who nonetheless delivered one of the strongest defences of the current registration regime after Wednesday's vote: Bob Rae --  who, incidentally, seemed to show little enthusiasm when asked to parse his party leader's recent equivocations on the issue. 

(Incidentally, just a friendly suggestion to Peter Van Loan: This is how you handle a scrum that seems to be about to get hostile): 

Bob Rae:                           I think first of all, what is the current situation? The current situation is we have a registry. It is still in existence. It is not being properly enforced by the federal government, but it is still in existence and I'm opposed to getting rid of it and the police are opposed to getting rid of it and the police are in favor of it. And I think we can - we can all discuss as time goes on what other possible mechanisms might be used, but for me right now, the battle is to stop this bill from being successful. I hope this bill loses in committee and loses on third reading. I hope it loses in the Senate, I hope it loses somewhere.

Question:                            But your party seems to be changing its position on it and your party (inaudible)...

Bob Rae:                           No, I don't so...

Question:                            (Inaudible)

Bob Rae:                           I don't think there is any - I don't think there is any change in the position, certainly not that I have heard from Mr. Ignatieff. I think he spoke very clearly yesterday about how he is favor of gun control and how we are all in favor of continuing...

Question:                            (Inaudible) like criminalization, he is the one who actually said the word, decriminalize while maintaining...

Bob Rae:                           Well, then you should talk to him about it.

Question:                            But it is your party policy.

Bob Rae:                           But then you should - then you should talk to him about it.

Question:                            But he is not here (inaudible).

Bob Rae:                           Right now, right now what I'm saying is that the bill is not law and it is a private member's bill. It is not yet the law of Canada and as far as I'm concerned the law we have is the law that I'm defending.

Question:                            And do you defend a law that includes criminal penalties or not?

Bob Rae:                           I'm in favor of the law that is there now and I'm opposed to the private member's bill.

Question:                            Are you opposed to any change to that law?

Bob Rae:                           I would rather...

Question:                            You just don't want to answer the question (Inaudible).

Bob Rae:                           That is fine, okay, we are fine.

Question:                            You don't - but you don't want to answer the question.

Bob Rae:                           I'm happy - I'm not going to get into a hypothetical discussion about what the alternatives might be because right now we have a bill that is in place, we have a law that is in place and I think, that is the law that should be respected.


Which raises an even more interesting question, really: What is the current Liberal policy on the gun registry -- not the Hoeppner bill, mind you, but the registry itself. If elected, would a Liberal government retain the current registration system -- or, if C-391 passes, restore it to its current form? I've got an email into Michael Ignatieff's office, and I'll let you know the answer as soon as I get one.

UPDATE: Answers! Well, an answer, at least. Go read! 

Tags: blackberry jungle, c-391, none dare call it frantic backpedalli -- oh wait., wayne easter