MP sets sights on registry
Bid to stop gun program's funding divides
Liberals
Bill Curry
CanWest News Service
Monday, December 06, 2004
OTTAWA - A Liberal MP, once a loyal supporter of Paul Martin, is taking on
his own fragile government in an effort to stop the flow of money to the
gun registry.
In the biggest test of the Liberal minority since the Throne Speech vote
on Oct. 7, Sarnia-Lambton MP Roger Gallaway's motion would scrap a
$97-million payment to the Canadian Firearms Centre, essentially killing
the program.
All 99 Conservative MPs are expected to support Mr. Gallaway, while the 54
Bloc Quebecois MPs will likely back the government. Making the vote
unpredictable, however, is that the Liberals and NDP are divided.
NDP MP Joe Comartin, who said he would have preferred a more symbolic
budget cut and will not support Mr. Gallaway, predicted most of the 19 New
Democratic MPs will side with the government. The rest of his colleagues
are still debating the matter, he said.
"For me, the big question mark is how many of the Liberals are going
to defect and vote against the government," said Mr. Comartin, who
represents Windsor-Tecumseh.
"The best estimate I can give you at the moment is between 10 and 20
[out of 135 Liberal MPs]," he said.
The proposed cut represents about 85% of the registry's annual budget. Mr.
Gallaway would not comment on the practical effect of his motion, but Mr.
Comartin said he is certain its passage would kill the registry.
The motion will be voted upon on Thursday, when annual spending estimates
of all departments come before Parliament.
Last week, the government admitted it will take at least three more years
to fully implement the registry, or a total of 12 years after Parliament
created it.
The new timetable means the program will have cost at least $1.4-billion
by then, said Conservative MP Garry Breitkreuz, who represents the
Saskatchewan riding of Yorkton-Melville. The government originally
promised the program would cost no more than $85-million.
Mr. Gallaway was one of the most outspoken agitators for Mr. Martin during
the years of Liberal infighting under Jean Chretien, and was given
responsibility for democratic reform when Mr. Martin became Prime Minister
a year ago. But Mr. Gallaway found himself back on the backbenches after
Mr. Martin's re-election.
Mr. Gallaway's biggest headlines during his time as parliamentary
secretary came when he contradicted then-government House leader Jacques
Saada as to whether a vote on an individual spending item such as the gun
registry is a matter of confidence.
Mr. Gallaway said the registry would be fair game, while Mr. Saada warned
of an election should such a motion pass. At the time, the Liberals had a
majority and the debate was moot.
Now Mr. Gallaway is going to push his premise, confident Mr. Martin will
not call an election over the registry. Mr. Gallaway said the government
has had plenty of time to answer MPs' concerns about how the money is
being spent, yet has failed to properly do so.
"I think we're entitled to a real explanation and we really have to
quit spending money in this fashion," he said.
"We've had a lot of promises of change but I really don't have any
time for those promises anymore. It's been nine years and it just keeps
going.
"It never stops."
Mr. Saada's replacement in the House leader's office, Tony Valeri, said he
wants to wait until tomorrow's deadline for such motions before deciding
whether to threaten an election or not.
In addition to the motion from Mr. Gallaway, the House will also have to
deal with two changes made by MPs in the government operations committee,
which surprised many by slashing $417,100 from the Governor-General's
budget and $127,223 from the mighty Privy Council Office.
In 2002, the Liberals capitulated to a Conservative motion blocking a
$72-million funding request for the gun registry. It came on the heels of
Auditor-General Sheila Fraser's blistering report describing the program
as having the "largest cost overrun we've ever seen."
But the Liberals argued they were only delaying the money in light of the
Auditor-General's report, and put forward more funding at a later date. |
