Mr. Speaker, I also support the points that have been made already and that the member for Sarnia—Lambton has brought forward in an unusual way. It is unusual for a government backbencher to, in such a forceful way, outline the failings and the inadequacies of his own government and his own minister on this file in particular.
We are talking about a motion that I raised in the House back on December 5, 2002, in which $72 million were taken away from this program by the unanimous consent of the House. All members of the House agreed that the firearms program should be reduced by that amount.
That does lead to questions as to: How is this program operating fully now? How is it that the government is continuing to fund this program? What are the sources of the funding that has continued?
The reports that have been brought before the House of Commons, the Hession report, also challenged the ability of the government to continue to fund this program without borrowing from other departments or borrowing from other areas.
The Auditor General also spoke of Parliament being kept in the dark, which is a substantial and damning statement to hear from the Auditor General.
We know that Bill C-10A was rammed through the Senate and will be coming back to us asking for more money for this particular program. The government is now scrambling to get this program fully funded through a piecemeal piece of legislation that has been picked apart in the other place and that will be sent back here. Now it is trying to shunt this issue to one side while millions more are going into the program.
Mr. Speaker, I want to specifically refer you to the House of Commons Procedure and Practice , Marleau and Montpetit, where it states at page 741, and I would ask for the Chair's particular attention to this point:
Once adopted, the legislation will authorize the government to withdraw from the Consolidated Revenue Fund amounts up to,--
And I emphasize, Mr. Speaker, “up to”:
--but not exceeding, the amounts set out in the Estimates for the purposes specified in the Votes.
We know, as a result of that December 5 motion, the government specifically reduced, unanimously, in the House, $72 million from the budget to operate the firearms program.
How is it, the hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton and other members of the House ask, that this registry is still operating at full capacity? How can that be? The spirit of that vote is being violated by the Minister of Justice continuing to operate this program. The spirit and intention of the House in reducing the funds by $72 million was obviously a signal that we were not supporting the continuation of the firearms program.
I would suggest that the hon. member has made a very salient and relevant point when he asks: Where is the money coming from? How is it that Parliament is permitting this to continue? How is it that the minister is continuing to fund this program?
The new budget is supposed to be coming forth. There is no doubt in my mind that there will be an attempt to reduce by some other amount, whether it be a dollar or more, and back door this funding for the program as we have seen in the past.
I would suggest that now is the time to cut this off, to put an end to this ridiculous, retroactive use of taxpayer money to fund a firearms program that is not working, that is not protecting Canadians.
The Minister of Justice is being misleading when he talks about Canadians being for gun control. This is not gun control. This--