Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of private member's Motion No. 387, sponsored by the member for Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert. I thank her for bringing this very important motion forward.
This is a votable motion calling for a public inquiry into the unprecedented cost overruns in the implementation of the infamous Canadian firearms registry. It also calls for the submission of a structured and detailed strategic plan that would have to be approved by the House in advance of the strategy taking effect.
The government has desperately tried to divert attention away from the horrific costs of the firearms registry. It has, at every turn, avoided questioning and scrutiny into the true cost of the firearms registry. It has done so because its original cost estimate of $2 million is now 500 times what it projected back in the 1990s. The total price tag to date of the Canadian firearms registry is more than $1 billion.
That fact alone is reason enough to support the motion. A full investigation must be conducted to determine how such a gross miscalculation on the part of the Liberal government has been made.
Last May, when the motion was first debated, my colleague from Yorkton—Melville listed 19 different reasons for supporting the motion, which, for those who are interested, are still part of the public record.
Today in the House he revealed another very important reason as to why we should support the motion. Today my Alliance colleague pointed out that on pages 13 and 88 of the supplementary estimates tabled yesterday by the President of the Treasury Board it showed $10 million under the “Canadian Firearms Centre, New Appropriation”.
Later that day, however, the Solicitor General, upon questioning in question period, said that no new money was being allocated through supplementary estimates. He said “Not one more cent. The money is not new money”, in response to the member for Yorkton—Melville.
As my colleague pointed out today, if the Solicitor General was right, then the supplementary estimates were wrong. If the opposite, however, is true, the Solicitor General misled the House. This is now a matter that is before you, Mr. Speaker.
Since Bill C-68 was first introduced in the House in 1995 we have repeatedly questioned the cost of establishing and maintaining the registry. And still, some eight years later, we still do not have an accurate dollar figure, although we know that this has been the worst budgetary overrun ever.
Similarly, they have blamed those provinces that have opted out of the administration of the law for cost overruns when the cost of the firearms registry rests solely on the government's shoulders and its failure to accurately calculate the exact cost of the registry before Bill C-68 was ever passed and proclaimed. It messed up.
Last April, I stood in the House on two occasions outlining the financial difficulties many municipalities in my riding were encountering in paying for police services. It appears that not only are municipalities faced with escalating costs for community policing services, but they are also burdened by the cost of enforcing the firearms laws and regulations, costs for which they were promised they would not be solely responsible.
In the spring I learned that the Camrose Police Commission threw its support behind the Alberta Association of Chiefs of Police's demands for more federal assistance with the cost of enforcing the law.
On February 12 the Alberta Association of Chiefs of Police wrote to the Minister of Justice outlining their concerns about the lack of funding. The letter apparently read, which was quoted in the Camrose Booster , a paper in my riding dated March 25, “We note that in all the discussions, briefings and planning for the implementation, much time was spent on the issues relating to the administrative aspects of this legislation. Forms and computer data banks seem to have dominated everyone's attention. Not much, if anything, has so far been said about the actual practicalities of enforcement of the act. More to the point, we note with concerns that the federal government has not yet expressed any view with respect to the source of funding for police activities arising out of the enforcement of this act”.
The letter was written by the president of the Alberta Association of Chiefs of Police, Marshall Chalmers, who also happens to be the chief of police with the Camrose Police Service.
Chief Chalmers has also stated “We have to convey to you with the greatest possible force and clarity that the municipal governments quite simply cannot assume this additional burden”.
Chief Chalmers stated quite unequivocally that without federal government support, police services in the province of Alberta will have no choice but to set an order of policing priorities that do not include the enforcement of the Firearms Act.
Interviewed by local newspapers on March 20, the Camrose chief of police said “the initial promise in relation to the act was that the federal government would pay for the entire cost of enforcement and there would be no downloading of costs onto the municipalities. But now it is very apparent that the federal government is expecting municipalities to absorb some of the costs”.
He goes on to say “Although, and in fairness to the Alberta chiefs of police, I must recognize this fact, the chiefs do accept the act as a valid piece of legislation, they feel the issue of enforcement must be addressed”.
I agree.
We have seen the government systematically download legislation, download acts that we expect community policing to absorb with no extra funding for community policing nor the municipalities. Mayors in other towns and communities have been very concerned about the extra costs associated with the firearms registration. We do not have an inquiry. We do not have an investigation. We do not understand many of the cost benefits of such an act.
Not only must the question of who pays the cost of enforcement, which clearly cannot fall on financially burdened municipalities, be answered, so must all the other outstanding questions regarding the cost of the registry.
Until all those questions are answered and a complete investigation and cost benefit analysis done, as recommended by the member for Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, I implore the government to put the firearms registry on ice.