So Why Did Peter Van Loan Sit on the RCMP Report Until After the Vote?

After watching this video, it's not hard to understand why Peter Van Loan's department was given a failing grade by the Auditor General. Like his partner in crime Jason Kenney, he's all bluster.

But that brings us to the question, why did he sit on the RCMP's report until after the vote on the gun registry? What is in there that he didn't want the House to know? We've been told that Gun registry queries by police jumped last year, but what weren't we told?

Ironically, the original headline for this article was 'Tories sit on RCMP gun-registry report', but it then got changed to 'Ignatieff opens door to gun registry changes'. I like the second one better, because it shows why he is going to make a great Prime Minister, because of his ability to see both sides of an issue. I guess that's why he was not only asked to teach at Harvard but invited to head up their human rights department.

My own feeling is that we should have left it alone, however, I can understand why several MPs from the opposition parties voted with the Reformers. It wasn't just because they were being blackmailed, but also because they were listening to their constituents in these rural ridings, which is how our system is supposed to work.

However, why did all the Reform Conservatives, even those from urban ridings, where the sentiment is different; not vote for their constituents? Why did they simply tow the party line, while expecting others to cross it?

If we really want to stop this neo-conservative movement in it's tracks, we have got to start listening to the concerns of all Canadians. The Ref-Cons are adept at following Leo Strauss's principle of searching out that "hot button" issue and beating the hell out of it. Fringe groups latch on and then use their own resources to promote the party they feel are listening.

As Mr. Ignatieff states in the article:

... his caucus supports the "principle of gun control," and he personally believes it should include long guns. But he said the issue has divided urban and rural Canadians, and faces "resistance" in rural Canada.

He said his caucus is working on proposals to bridge that gap. In French, he suggested it could include "decriminalizing" the registration system for long guns.

"The fundamental issue is to make sure we get a system of gun control which works both for rural Canada and for urban Canada," Ignatieff said.

"We want to listen to victims groups, sports hunters, legitimate gun owners to find a way to rebuild legitimacy for the gun registry in rural Canada. That's not a thing you can do overnight."

Ignatieff said changes would start with a "simple principle: we are for a firearms registration system that includes all firearms, but there is a problem of resistance in rural areas. It could be possible to decriminalize but to maintain a firearms registration system for long guns."

Ignatieff downplayed the impact of a Commons vote that is expected to give "second reading" to a Conservative MP's private member's bill to repeal the registry.

"It's not the end of the firearms registration system tonight. It's only the beginning of a parliamentary process that will be pursued in committee and in the senate."

The Association of Police Chiefs have filed this report entitled Proposal to scrap Canada’s gun control system is a serious threat to public safety. They are the people we should be listening to. I know that Mr. Igantieff is.