NDP (& Libs?) to Scrap Gun Registry?!
If true, damn you to hell, Iffy. I just caught Con MP Hoeppner on CBC panel and when Nathan Cullen affirmed that Layton was once again going to allow a free vote on a matter of policy rather than conscience I was furious, realising there may be enough gutless & stupid rural NDP MPs who can help the Cons to scrap the gun registry - only need 12 votes. So I googled news on the bill and came across this gem: "Jill Fairbrother said private member's bills are traditionally free votes and she does not expect this one will be any different." Are you frigging kidding me?! Wrong on the issue, wrong on the precedent. Private members' bills are NOT free votes, unless of course they concern some uniquely personal moral issue, like abortion, capital punishment, etc.. It's ALWAYS up to leader & whip to declare which are free or not, whatever-whoever's moving a bill, govt, opposition, members. This quote from Fairbrother is nonsense, and disingenuous nonsense. I really hope she "misspoke" and as she's apparently gone, we can stand up for wise public policy, our own legacy, and what police forces everywhere want, and defend the registry. Are you kidding me? We're contemplating killing off the gun registry? WTF?! How bad politics is that? How wrong is that? So we can please Iffy's friends in the oil sands even more?! While betraying ourselves and the vast majority of not just our electorate but the entire Canadian electorate?! It's shameful enough that yesterday we colluded in a terrible motion aimed at attacking Federal institutions, bilingualism, unity, & Charest, now we're going to bend so far over we're going to screw our own gun control legislation? I expect no better from the Layton Luvvies but our own caucus is going to let Iffy declare a free vote on the gun registry? WTF? Are you kidding? Iffy & Co. already pressured caucus into a ridiculous free vote on Afghanistan in 2006, condemning more Canadian blood & treasure wasted beyond 2007, by his and one or two other votes, now he's going to have us have a free vote on the gun registry, guaranteeing its death? Pretty soon, lexicographers are going to sue us for misuse of the title Liberal. I'm tired of being outraged, can we not just do the right thing, for once?
As for more votes on a one- or two- line whip, which I favour, first all parties have to agree on the rules (remember how Martin tried and got no cooperation?), and second, they're always for issues not covered by existing party policy and platforms. Gun control is established Liberal policy, platform and legislation. If the NDP has sold out so much, all the more to highlight their knavery - I'll happily campaign in Outremont on gun control, as I'm sure other Libs will vs. NDP in Vancouver, Toronto, Halifax, etc.. But let's be good and smart - at least once. Is that so much to ask?
As for more votes on a one- or two- line whip, which I favour, first all parties have to agree on the rules (remember how Martin tried and got no cooperation?), and second, they're always for issues not covered by existing party policy and platforms. Gun control is established Liberal policy, platform and legislation. If the NDP has sold out so much, all the more to highlight their knavery - I'll happily campaign in Outremont on gun control, as I'm sure other Libs will vs. NDP in Vancouver, Toronto, Halifax, etc.. But let's be good and smart - at least once. Is that so much to ask?
posted by Eugene Forsey Liberal @ 6:33 PM
15 Comments:
At 7:26 PM,
Michael Harkov said…
If true, damn you to hell, Iffy.
Another satisfied Liberal customer. :D
LMAO.
At 7:31 PM,
austin said…
"While betraying ourselves and the vast majority of not just our electorate but the entire Canadian electorate?"
The vast majority of Canadians view the gun registry as a boondoggle. It has done nothing but irritate innocent gun owners and hunters. Criminals do not register thier illegal guns. When looking to come out of deficit, cutting wasteful programs like this is a good start.
At 9:28 PM,
Anonymous said…
The implementation of the program was definitely inefficient. However, there hasn't been any audit that shows the ongoing management of the program has been inefficient. And police chiefs across the country have soundly praised the registry as an effective law enforcement tool. If Iggy doesn't have the Party stand up for Liberal principles on this he can kiss his ass goodbye.
At 9:33 PM,
gary said…
The gun registry is one of the many reasons there are only 7 Liberals MPs of the 92 west of Ontario. The Liberal Party by reactions like that in this post reinforce and maintain the disconnect with western voters. The Liberal record in Western Canada is in terms if a percentage of the seats much worse than the CPC percentage of seats in Quebec where the party seems to think their salvation lies.
Perhaps Liberal salvation actually lies in reconnecting with the growing parts of the country rather than trying, again, to take back what seems gone for a very long time to the Bloc in Quebec.
At 9:48 PM,
rww said…
As someone who worked on Parliament Hill for over 30 years it was always my understanding that private members business was normally free vote but I checked just to be certain.
Glossary of Parliamentary Procedure
free vote
Non-procedural term, meaning a vote during which party discipline is not imposed on individual Members. Votes on private Members' business are usually conducted as free votes.
http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/about/process/house/glossary/glossary-e.htm#sectF
At 9:58 PM,
Robert said…
Really Private members bills are free votes? So all the Liberals who voted to put off the climate change bill did it freely? Ouch what a terrible party, spinning one way only to off put there message in the other.
At 10:11 PM,
Eugene Forsey Liberal said…
rww: in principle, you're absolutely right, as private members' bills, in Canada, given the topics they choose, are usually narrowly targeted on what one might, without wanting to dismiss their importance, call "micro-issues", all the better to survive the legislative process. But there is no tradition of not enforcing the party line when private members' bills touch on issues related to parties' platforms, policies and legislation. It's up to the Leader & Whip, and any time there's a chance of the party's position being defeated, they enforce the whip. Of course, if there's no chance, they're often happy to give caucus outliers a chance to express themselves. In this case, though, given Con lockstep on the issue and the 12 vote margin, as the Con MP sponsoring the motion notes, it may only take 10 votes in fact to pass bill and get past first hurdle, ie. into committee. That's why the anti-gun control lobby is throwing so much effort and money into lobbying and Bill Blair is so freaked, as are those of us in favour of gun control. This is the Layton NDP, going back to Desjarlais - OK to vote your conscience on gun control, but not on same sex marriage? That's contrary to all precedent. But then again, whoever expected a jumped up municipal councillor like Layton to know? At least Blaikie is out of this madness and doing productive work in government. (NB. I am and was in favour of same sex marriage, but it doesn't change the fact that some issues are clearly matters of conscience, like capital punishment, which I oppose, and should obviously be free votes, and others, like gun control, are public policy and must absolutely be subject to whip).
At 10:53 PM,
Anonymous said…
It is only the guns for the rural population, they want to scrap..not the entire gun registry
At 3:18 AM,
lyrical said…
Sometimes it's good to read the papers in the smaller centres on these issues. They provide more local insight.
(Note: Beer survey optional.)
At 9:05 AM,
Anonymous said…
Yup, because they can absolutely guarantee that a rural man won't lose his temper or get drunk or get stressed out and shoot someone.
The cost to keep it going - $100,000 a year.
Because rural people don't like registering - what about cars, etc. Stop that too?
At 12:37 PM,
Unknown said…
The only reason the vast majority of Canadians view the gun registry as a boondoggle is because of the con propaganda machine. How did Bush get elected a second term?
Austine said“cutting wasteful programs like this is a good start.” According to the National Public Services Research Institute, the total yearly cost associated with gunshot wounds in Canada is $6.6 billion. Suicides and attempted suicides account for the bulk of those costs ($4.7 billion); homicides and assaults are next ($1.1 billion). Scrap the gun registry but will you save money?
Criminals don’t register their illegal guns; please tell me who makes these illegal guns. Where do they come from, are they manufactured in some basement?
The cons solution to Buy America provisions is to scrap the gun registry and stop the profitable gun trafficking racket from the US. Why should the Cdn criminals give up their hard earn cash to pay top dollar for US illegal firearms? Change the gun laws in Canada to mirror some of the US states gun laws; the firearm owner becomes less accountable, cross boarder gun trafficking will no longer be an issue.
If all workplaces had strict control of pens and pencils, I wonder what the total yearly savings would be in office supplies.
At 1:18 PM,
austin said…
I do not know what your point is Luke but the gun registry has NEVER prevented one crime or even solved one. Not one penny of that $6.6(I would also like to see where you get your numbers from)billion could be saved with any gun laws. In case you did not know it is actually a long gun registry, hand guns have been illegal in Canada for a long time.
"Criminals don’t register their illegal guns; please tell me who makes these illegal guns. Where do they come from, are they manufactured in some basement?"Luke
Is this a serious question? Hand guns, machine guns and assault rifles are what is used by most criminals and you can not register them.
At 4:58 PM,
ADHR said…
EFL,
Oh, dear. Bizarre hatred for Jack Layton and municipal councillors. Calling a civil rights issue (same-sex marriage) a matter of "conscience". And not even reading the article you linked to.
The issue is whether to send the bill to committee for further study. Not to scrap the registry, but to study it. Whipping the vote on something so inconsequential makes no sense. Why not study it? If it turns out the registry makes sense, then the committee should be able to find that out.
At 6:31 PM,
Eugene Forsey Liberal said…
ADHR: weak. Are the NDP for registry or not? All it takes is one Opp MP on committee to be pro-gun and it's back in front of HOC. Even without one, can't stall and/or kill it forever. And then after X-Mas, with Lib retirees and new Con Senate appointees, through Senate. I didn't need to link to glossary, already know it, though I did. I note you avoid the whole shameful treatment of Desjarlais as a result of ignoring praliamentary precedent. But then again, as I said, trying to be kind: maybe Jack just doesn't know this stuff (maybe ghost of Stanley Knowles can set him straight). YOUR PARTY, led by YOUR leader, supposed social-democrats, are about to once again be patsies for neo-conservatives. And you can't even manage to criticise such dereliction of principle and duty? Dippers have become potemkin social-democrats, sadder even than Iggiots, given the noble roots of the CCF. No wonder Blaikie took refuge as Deputy Speaker and now is doing good work in Manitoba. Not like the sick puppies there now. Mulcair? Pat Martin? Yech. Suck to be you, I guess. Makes me feel better about my own party, at least.
At 11:14 AM,
Anonymous said…
Interesting story as for me. I'd like to read a bit more concerning that theme. Thank you for sharing that information.
Joan Stepsen
Cool geeks
Post a Comment
<< Home