153 to 151 - The Yeas have it and the Gun Registry survives to see another day

Well, that's it for the great gun registry debate of 2009 - 2010. Bill C-391 was just defeated by 2 votes, thanks in large part to the NDP and the whipping of the Liberals.

I'd like to take just a quick last look at the issue.

Canadians have been conned by our elected ones into believing that the vote on Bill C-391 was split along rural-urban lines with John Baird even summoning the ghosts of the “urban elite”. By feeding us that line of propaganda, it made it appear that there was little support for the Bill among those in urban settings. Nothing could be further from the truth. An EKOS poll from November 2009 found that the societal fracture in the issue was along several lines:

1.) Only 46% of Canadians felt that all Canadians should have a legal right to bear arms with 54% feeling that gun ownership should be outlawed completely except for law enforcement officials. The split was along provincial lines with a poll showing that only 41% of Ontario residents and 36% of Quebec residents felt that it should be legal for ordinary citizens to own guns of any type compared to 62% in Atlantic Canada, 64% in the Prairies and 69% in Alberta.

2.) Supporters of the gun registry tended to be university-educated with 38% supporting the registry compared to 31% who supported abolishing the registry.

3.) Supporters of the gun registry tended to be Liberal or BQ supporters.

4.) Supporters of the gun registry tended to live in Ontario and Quebec.

5.) Supporters of the gun registry tended to be under 65 years of age.

6.) Supporter of the gun registry tended to be female.

7.) A majority of all Canadians (64%) believe that guns should be banned in urban areas.

From the responses, it appears that Canada is very divided on the gun registry issue, but definitely not only along rural-urban lines. Why didn’t Conservative politicians bring up the issue that 47% of male respondents wanted to abolish the gun registry compared to the 30% of women surveyed? Why didn’t they focus on pitting the 45% of Canadians 65 and older who favoured abolition versus the 29% of Canadians under 25? Why exactly did our politicians focus on the rural-urban issue? I honestly cannot answer that question except to say that perhaps the issue something visceral and historical but relatively harmless compared to pitting seniors against the younger crowd and men against women (and we all know that's a no-winner).

Interestingly enough, a very large 31% of respondents to the poll had no opinion suggesting that there is more ambivalence toward the issue than the media or our politicians would have us believe. It’s apparent that all of the talking points about the registry over the past 10 months have been just that; talk.

As Canadians, we have to be careful about what we believe, especially when we are using politicians as our source of information. Their primary goal is to get re-elected, nothing more and nothing less. If in the process they divide Canadians, sadly, that seems to be of little concern to them.

One last point. If the Harper government was convinced that it was a good idea to get rid of the gun registry, why did they let Candice Hoeppner introduce Bill C-391 as a private members bill rather than introducing it on the floor as a bill that could have been subjected to a vote of confidence? Or, was it that the Harperites knew that getting rid of the registry was a very divisive issue that was only going to split Canadians roughly in half and so they had it introduced as a weaker private members bill because they didn't want to trigger an election over an issue that was so contentious and probably a non-winner.

In any case, the issue now has the unmistakable stench of an election issue; the Harper government can now point out the fact that they kept one of their campaign promises from 5 years ago when we next go to the polls.

Stamps and Guns and "Other Expenses"

I thought I'd post a three catch-ups on items that I posted earlier this week.

1.) Stamps, Guns and Candice: On Wednesday, I posted a writeup about Candice Hoeppner's attempts to influence voters in Wayne Easter's Malpeque riding using her MP postage budget regarding her Private Members Bill C-391. Yesterday, in the Globe and Mail, she admitted that she had sent out between 500 and 800 letters to "people who indicated to her that they are interested in the issue" of dismantling the gun registry. She sent these letters to voters in the eight Liberal ridings whose MPs voted for her bill in second reading back in November 2009, against their Party. She's urging these people to put pressure on their MP to vote for the Bill. While I am in agreement with her Bill (although it is $2 billion too late), I am not in agreement with her tactic. Yes, according to "the letter of the law", she complied with the rules of the House and is allowed to use her postage budget in this manner. My concern is that she has now wasted roughly $450 of taxpayers' money strictly to further promote her own agenda on this one issue. That is wrong, especially in light of the recent ban on the clearly partisan "10 percenters".

2.) Go get 'em Sheila Fraser: In yesterday's posting, I discussed the MP refusal to allow Auditor-General Sheila Fraser access so that she could audit their MP expense budget. The Board of Internal Economy used the excuse that it was beyond her mandate and then took off for a one week break. Despite the media's attempts to ask both the Liberal and Conservative Government House Leaders about this issue, they were unsuccessful. As well, a recent poll indicated that 88% of Canadians thought that MPs expenses should be public but I guess that's not enough for the Board of Internal Economy, after all, 12% still think MPs shouldn't be scrutinized! Fortunately, the Globe and Mail has posted a pdf file listing all Member's expenditures for the 2008 - 2009 fiscal year. It is downloadable (after you click a few times on the Scribd website) but it makes for fascinating reading. You don't get specific expenditures (i.e. how many toilet seats were bought) but you do get an idea of how much is spent on travel, telephones, printing, office rent etcetera and you can see how much your own MP spends compared to his or her peers. One column I found particularly interesting was "Other" Some MPs like Ken Epp of Edmonton - Sherwood Park had expenses as little as zero in that column, others like Steven Fletcher of Charleswood - St. James - Assiniboia had "Other" expenses as great as $308,905. It sure would be nice to know what that was spent on but taxpayers will never know because Board of Internal Economy decisions are made behind closed doors.

I say, keep trying Ms. Fraser, Canadians deserve to know how 500 million tax dollars are being spent.

3.) Helena Guergis: On May 13th, 2010, the much persecuted Helena Guergis posted this press release on her website. I don't have much to say about it other than it does seem to contradict some of the statements she made in the CBC interview with Peter Mansbridge earlier this week. What stood out to me was the reversal of her comments on Monday regarding her husband's non-use/now use of her Parliamentary email account through her Blackberry. This story has more twists and turns than a drunk driver on a mountain highway. The press release is worth a read if only to put her spin on things after she took the time to mull over her Mansbridge interview.

Wayne Easter, guns and more CPC propaganda

In Wednesday's Globe and Mail, there was a back page item about a couple of issues that are near and dear to me all nicely wrapped up in one article.

Yes folks, as hard as it is to believe, those clever Conservatives in Ottawa have apparently found a way around the recent ban placed on those wonderful "10 percenters". You may recall that I've had a real "bee in my bonnet" about those little pieces of paper, especially because my riding seemed to be ground zero for the CPC propaganda blitz. Fortunately though, the delivery of Conservative Party partisan propaganda will continue with only a very short interruption in service. Yeah! It's wonderful to know that the tax dollars that I just nicely sent to Ottawa on April 30th will be returned to me so quickly. I certainly wouldn't have credited the crowd on the government side of the floor with the kind of intelligence it took to cook up this scheme but apparently, someone in the back rooms is a pretty smart cookie when it comes to spending our tax dollars on partisan propaganda.

Remember way back in mid-March when the House voted 140 to 137 to ask the Board of Internal Economy to end the wasteful practice of MPs sending out "10 percenters" to ridings that weren't their own? This practice was costing taxpayers $10 million a year. The Conservatives voted against the Liberal motion at first but after some sober second thought, the PMO announced that the Conservatives supported ending the practice if, and only if, the Board of Internal Economy supported it. On March 30th, the Board, (which makes its decisions in secret) with representatives from all parties, announced that the use of "10 percenters" had been discontinued. Because the Board debates in secret, we'll never know which MPs voted for and which voted against continuing the practice but I suspect that the story released today tells the whole tale.

Apparently, Ms. Candice Hoeppner (Conservative - Portage-Lisgar Manitoba) of Private Members Bill C-391 fame (abolishing the gun registry) has found another very clever way of contacting voters outside of her riding. She is using her taxpayer-funded postage budget to send letters to the electorate in Wayne Easter's (Liberal - Malpeque) riding. In her letter, she asks the people of the Malpeque riding whether his stance on the gun registry represents what they really want and informs them that Mr. Easter will have to vote along Liberal Party lines since Mr. Ignatieff has decided that the vote on Bill C-391 will be a whipped vote. She has selected Mr. Easter's riding for special attention since Mr. Easter was one of eight Liberal MPs to vote against his party back in November 2009 when there was a free vote on Bill C-391. His riding has been the target of numerous "10 percenters" on the registry issue and a selection of mesmerizing radio ads that unfortunately are no longer available on the conservative.ca website. Ms. Hoeppner and the Conservatives are trying to force Mr. Easter to vote for the Bill when it comes back to the House for third reading after spending time in Committee.

I'm the first to admit that Wayne Easter's stance on dismantling the gun registry seems to change on a near daily basis. It's pretty hard to know what he's thinking from one day to the next but it appears that he's now decided that (most likely because he's been told what to think) that the registry is a good idea. That's at least three different stances he's taken on the same issue but that's neither here nor there.

What is objectionable is that our elected government has found yet another way to use taxpayers' money to fund their pre-election partisan propagandizing. That is nothing less than immoral and Ms. Hoeppner should regard this action as a personal embarrassment. Unfortunately, MP budgets are determined by the same secretive Board of Internal Economy and specific expenditures are hard to determine so it will be very difficult for Canadians to find out how much is being spent under this new, improved scheme.

There's something wrong in Ottawa and I have no idea how it can be fixed. Perhaps the problem stems from the overwhelming sense of entitlement (to Canadian's tax dollars) that our elected officials develop once they hit the hallowed halls of Parliament.