Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security
EVIDENCE – Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Ms. Candice Hoeppner (Portage—Lisgar, CPC):
Minister Toews, I want to thank you personally for your persistent support for those like me in our caucus who stand against the long-gun registry.
Bill C-391 and C-19 are both straightforward bills that end the requirements for individuals and businesses to register non-restricted, non-prohibited firearms. I was concerned this morning when I read media reports of an analysis done by officials. A certain official thought that both C-391 and C-19 could have a number of unintended consequences, including the trafficking of firearms at the border.
I was concerned about this report. Is it accurate? Can you comment on this official’s opinion?Hon. Vic Toews:
I had a chance to take a look at that article. I wasn’t familiar with the memorandum, which an official in my department had prepared, I assume, for internal purposes. But now that I’ve seen it, it’s clear that the analysis presented by this official is factually flawed; it’s incorrect. I’ve asked my deputy minister to look into the matter.
Contrary to the suggestion made in the analysis, neither Bill C-19 nor Bill C-391 removes any controls on the importation of firearms. In fact, we have increased penalties for the illegal importation of firearms. Canadians gave our government a strong mandate to end this wasteful, ineffective long-gun registry once and for all. That’s exactly what we’re doing. We’re not getting into the areas this memorandum suggested we might get into. I think the memorandum is phrased to suggest that if we did something else, the repercussions would be such and such. But we’re not going down that road.Ms. Candice Hoeppner:
Just to be clear, C-19 doesn’t change the way our border officials are able to monitor, track, or stop legal guns from coming into the country.
Hon. Vic Toews:
No. The analysis of whether or not something is a prohibited or non-restricted firearm has nothing to do with the registry. That’s an analysis that the officers make at the border and elsewhere throughout the country. Tying that to C-19 is a bit of a red herring. As I said, the analysis is quite flawed.
Ms. Candice Hoeppner:
Thank you for clarifying that. I’m sure it will be clarified in future media reports as well.
Hon. Vic Toews:
Don’t bet on it.
h/t Just Another Jaybird
“Ms. Candice Hoeppner:
Thank you for clarifying that. I’m sure it will be clarified in future media reports as well.
Hon. Vic Toews:
Don’t bet on it.”
Brava. She asked the perfect question,and he gave the perfect,non-PCbullcrap answer!
You can bet next years pay cheque and your first born that the ONLY one who will clarify it is Sun News.
Hardly a day goes by where this majority government doesn’t put a smile on my face.
“Don’t bet on it”
These guys ‘Get It’ in a way that Mulroney’s morons never did. They know what the landscape is and they are battling seriously.
All those warning Paul Martin gave about these Tories not being the same as Robert Stanfield and Joe Clark?
Thank God he was right.
I love the Conservative majority. Its AWESOME. ~:)
Great exchange between the two Ministers, got the message out and zinged the media in one fell swoop.
I’ve either watched or listened to the series of committee meetings, Its almost pathetic watching the lefties coming in, spewing their tired old stories, then get questioned.
When the questions are not the standard, ‘oh you poor dear’ they tend to crawl away like whipped pups. The media on hand is obssesively twisting the story for any outrage they can wring from it, and to this date haven’t been very successfull.
So who was the sleazy bureaucrat that made that analysis?
This was NO accident,but another example of a tenured civil servant attempting to subvert the intentions of the Government,and the people who ELECTED that Government.
Fire the SOB.
Candice is a tireless hero. And to think that one of my daughters and her husband live in that riding and (barf) vote NDP.
Sigh. Oh well, you do your best, but can’t win them all. BTW, daughter is a product of U of Manitoba. Enough said.
The exchange between Toews and Francis Scarpaleggia is hilarious.
Ken (Kulak) at November 26, 2011 1:42 PM
Every family has them Ken. 🙂
Ken (Kulak) at November 26, 2011 1:42 PM
Every family has them Ken. 🙂
Yes, I have one of them too, Ken (Kulak) but I also am happy to report that I have a ‘reformed’ former Liberano brother too. There is hope.
Candice is a fabulous M.P.
@Ken KULAK
Paul here, just saying my brother has alway’s been a conservative , he also handed me a book called america alone , i used to be a liberano as well , that book opened my eyes and i started to question then i became a conservative , and have been reading books (and this blog ) ever since , My cousin is also a product of the UofM and is a liberano of the worst kind she came from a hard working middle class farming town and is now all about multi-culti crap , she was alway’s proud to be from her small town and proud of her race.
Enough indoctrination will make anyone hate the white race. But we will see where this leads i think she will snap out of it ..but when i have no idea. Also if you go to the facebokm page for small dead animals i wouldl iek to give you some infomation as well.
“Don’t bet on it”.
That’s my pick for Canadian politician quote of the year. And with only a month left, I don’t think anyone’s going to top it!
Watch it Ken. I’m a U of M alumnus and it was back in the days when you actually had to take an exam or two. I think the problem was I attended while I was serving our country. Dipper sh*t doesn’t stick on me.
I believe the “sleazy” bureaucrat’s name is POTTER.
Let’s see. This whole story started from within the federal bureaucracy, a liberal creation. Now, just possibly, it is stuffed with liberals.
They are fighting a rearguard action as they all will be retiring soon. On stupifyingly fat pensions, thank you very much suckers.
I suggest these pensions should be reduced.
Hang on, the memo concerned the private members bill that was tabled during the last session, before the election. How was that considered to be relevant to C-19? These are two totally different acts written by different people.
This is a non-story that was run by the lame-stream media to generate controversy. Another reason to distrust anyone with a journalism degree.
Texas Canuck>
Present company excepted. I won’t hold it against you, as you did not get sucked in like she did. 🙂
At a church service in Winnipeg where our daughter attended, the speaker that day was a U of M prof and the handout had a header that said “Marxism is good, Capitalism is bad”. I did not realize that I had that much self control. Must have been the army training.
Paul>
I have not a clue how to use facebook, but I will take a look.
” At a church service…Marxism is good, Capitalism is bad”.
Holy restraint Batman, that sounds like religion and politics are being stirred in the same pot. It is a fact that capitalists give more to charities than their socialist brothers (who freely donate other people’s money). Look it up.
Texas Canuck “that sounds like religion and politics are being stirred in the same pot”. That my friend is exactly what is happening in many mainstream and some not so mainstream churches. Thank goodness many smaller Protestant conferences and by and large the Catholic, Orthodox faiths are resisting the Marxist infection.
…Thank goodness many smaller Protestant conferences and by and large the Catholic, Orthodox faiths are resisting the Marxist infection.
Posted by: Ken (Kulak) at November 26, 2011 10:08 PM
Aye. And if they know what’s good for them, they’ll steer the course.