Friday, June 18, 2004
I lied.
One more post before I mosy off to beautiful K-Country, this one on the subject of David Kilgour's comments on the gun registry.
First of all, let's be very clear on the fact that he's right. Gun control is good. The federal long gun registry is useless, and expensive. I'm not sure whether it should be actually scrapped - that depends on whether the registry is of any current functionality, or whether more money would have to be sunk in - but the fact that, in principle, the registry has been a failure is scarcely disputable.
The thing is that Kilgour has been representing the voters of Edmonton-Southeast since the registry was but a glimmer in Allan Rock's eye, and I don't recall him using his position as MP to do anything about this. Did he vote against the legislation establishing the registry? Against a supply motion required to keep the registry going? Nope.
David Kilgour's got the first part of being a good legislator right - the part where you make up your own mind rather than letting party leadership do it for you - but has only once demonstrated the courage of his convictions in Parliament, that being on the GST issue (said convictions, interestingly, being demonstrated at a time in which abandoning the P.C. Party on principle could easily be mistaken for shameless opportunism) when Kilgour got himself expelled from Brian Mulroney's Progressive Conservative caucus and subsequently joined the Liberals.
An argument could be made that as long as Kilgour was a member of the Chrétien cabinet, he couldn't oppose any government legislation. There's some truth to that (which shows why the Canadian federation needs a separation of powers even more than the S.U. does), but if Kilgour truly considered his first responsibility to be to his constituents, and if being in cabinet was an impediment to his ability to do so, he could and should have resigned.
While his comments were a masterful political move, allowing Kilgour to portray himself as a "Good Liberal" (not like all those bastards from Ontario), voters in Edmonton-Beaumont would do well to consider the man's record, and to receive a direct commitment from him to actually *vote* against giving the registry any more money (and that means showing up to the Commons on the day of the vote, David), before re-electing him on that basis.
Finally, a prediction: if Kilgour is re-elected and isn't appointed to a cabinet post (the only way he will be is if Paul Martin remains Prime Minister and Anne McLellan is defeated), he will change parties once more before the next election.
|
One more post before I mosy off to beautiful K-Country, this one on the subject of David Kilgour's comments on the gun registry.
First of all, let's be very clear on the fact that he's right. Gun control is good. The federal long gun registry is useless, and expensive. I'm not sure whether it should be actually scrapped - that depends on whether the registry is of any current functionality, or whether more money would have to be sunk in - but the fact that, in principle, the registry has been a failure is scarcely disputable.
The thing is that Kilgour has been representing the voters of Edmonton-Southeast since the registry was but a glimmer in Allan Rock's eye, and I don't recall him using his position as MP to do anything about this. Did he vote against the legislation establishing the registry? Against a supply motion required to keep the registry going? Nope.
David Kilgour's got the first part of being a good legislator right - the part where you make up your own mind rather than letting party leadership do it for you - but has only once demonstrated the courage of his convictions in Parliament, that being on the GST issue (said convictions, interestingly, being demonstrated at a time in which abandoning the P.C. Party on principle could easily be mistaken for shameless opportunism) when Kilgour got himself expelled from Brian Mulroney's Progressive Conservative caucus and subsequently joined the Liberals.
An argument could be made that as long as Kilgour was a member of the Chrétien cabinet, he couldn't oppose any government legislation. There's some truth to that (which shows why the Canadian federation needs a separation of powers even more than the S.U. does), but if Kilgour truly considered his first responsibility to be to his constituents, and if being in cabinet was an impediment to his ability to do so, he could and should have resigned.
While his comments were a masterful political move, allowing Kilgour to portray himself as a "Good Liberal" (not like all those bastards from Ontario), voters in Edmonton-Beaumont would do well to consider the man's record, and to receive a direct commitment from him to actually *vote* against giving the registry any more money (and that means showing up to the Commons on the day of the vote, David), before re-electing him on that basis.
Finally, a prediction: if Kilgour is re-elected and isn't appointed to a cabinet post (the only way he will be is if Paul Martin remains Prime Minister and Anne McLellan is defeated), he will change parties once more before the next election.
