X Close

Basic Math
Print
All Projects [Home] — PublicationsPolicy Notes
A A A

(EM780)
September 21, 2012

In Brief:

  • Quebec has taken Ottawa to court, opposing the destruction of the long gun registry data
  • A Quebec Court last week ruled favourably to Quebec
  • The registry would amount to more area in which the Quebec government keeps a tight control of its citizens, often robbing them of some freedoms
  • Ottawa has announced that it will appeal the decision. It has no obligation to help Quebec curtail more freedoms in Canada.


Quebec Shouldn’t be Given its Gun Registry Data

Knowledge is power to the wise, but where wisdom is lacking to those hungry for power, a simple diet of data will suffice. It is such appetite that drives Quebec to preserve the long gun registry data.

Getting rid of the registry was a Conservative campaign promise that was fulfilled last April. The new federal legislation stopped forcing lawful owners of long weapons to register them and relaxed requirements around selling or transferring these firearms. It is not an abandonment of federal responsibility over criminal matters. Firearm licences and the registry for restricted and prohibited firearms, such as pistols, still exist.

But before Bill C-19 to scrap the registry was even introduced in the Senate, the government of Quebec spoiled for a fight to get its hands on the Quebec part of the data, wishing to establish its own registry. Upon enactment, Quebec immediately launched a court challenge to stop the data involving more than 1.5 million long guns registered by Quebecers from being destroyed.

Quebec recently won the first instalment of its court challenge. A Quebec court ordered the federal government to surrender the data within 30 days. Ottawa said Monday that it will appeal the ruling.

From the many accusations and acrimonious remarks, we can filter three arguments in favour of preserving the registry’s data involving Quebecers. Ironically, the first and perhaps the most valid is a constitutional argument once used against the creation of the federal registry. According to Justice Marc-Andre Blanchard, the federal government must not invoke jurisdiction over criminal law to overstep the provincial power over property.

“We have here an abusive use of criminal-law jurisdiction to encroach onto a domain of provincial jurisdiction,” Blanchard said.

But it’s a bit late for that. The Supreme Court blessed the federal registry on account of its federal criminal jurisdiction. Blanchard wants to have the constitutional cake and eat it too.

The second is saving money. Quebec Public Security Minister Robert Dutil said that Quebec should be given the data it paid for. Paying for something in these matters doesn’t entitle one to have them. We cannot demand ownership of Canadian Forces equipment because we pay taxes any more than Alberta could demand ownership of ... well, so much in Quebec.

Lastly, there is a sad sense that governments make legislation strictly to honour people. Allan Rock was so successful at marrying the legislation to the 1989 Montreal massacre that some misguidedly wish to keep it, seeing the law as a memorial to the victims. These are not convincing arguments.

The court decision compels the federal government to hand over what it has, but it also forces Ottawa to keep registering long guns and recording transfers of ownership for Quebecers until it fully submits the database to the province. Blanchard’s respect for constitutional jurisdictions cuts one way only. While he wishes for Ottawa not to impose on Quebec, he is just fine with Quebec imposing on Ottawa.

It’s true that our Constitution grants provinces jurisdiction over property. This is why we register our dwellings and our vehicles through provinces. Forcing Quebecers to register their long weapons with a provincial authority is not unconstitutional. But nowhere does it say that the feds have to help them. Not unlike in fiscal matters, Quebec claims autonomy and wants to force the help of those it claims autonomy from in the same breath.

The prime minister believes in strong provincial rights, but he also believes in individual rights. The Quebec government is the government of Quebecers, but as long as Quebec is in Canada, the Canadian Parliament also has a duty to protect them, and help to protect them. Placing matters in context, we should ask whether Ottawa should willingly help Quebec impose greater controls over those Canadians.

Quebec typically seeks to tax, register and control most areas of life. Quebec compels all housing leases to expire at the same time, forces women to keep their maiden names for the sake of tracking them better, follows citizens throughout their lives, compelling usage of student numbers long after they have left the school system, commands state permission to name one’s child, forces people to post public commercial signs outdoors exclusively in French, and demands a special permit to send one’s children to school in English. It so mothers its people that it even runs an outdoors network, providing camping services with all the equipment, including tents.

Ottawa should have no part in the cuddling and controlling of Canadian citizens to such extent. It cannot stop Quebec from doing what it does, but has no obligation to help.

Ottawa has a duty to fight the court order.

Bookmark and Share


Author's Picture Marco Navarro-Génie

(BA [Hons.]  Concordia University; MA, PhD [Political Science] University of Calgary), is the Vice President, Research at the Frontier Centre.  He also teaches political science in the Department of Policy Studies at Mount Royal University in Calgary, and has taught at St. Mary’s College, Southern Alberta Institute of Technology (SAIT), the University of Calgary, and Concordia University in Montreal. His academic work focuses on radical revolutionary movements, and cultural and political identity in Latin America. His teaching and pioneering research have been recognized, respectively, by a Distinguished Faculty Teaching Award (1999) at Mount Royal University, and an Izaak Walton Killam Memorial Scholarship (2004-2006) held at the University of Calgary. He is a Fellow at the Latin American Research Centre at the University of Calgary, and is author of Augusto "César" Sandino: Messiah of Light and Truth. Dr. Navarro-Génie was a member of the Board of Directors for The International Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Development (Rights and Democracy) 2009-2012. He is fluent in English, French, and Spanish. He regularly comments on Canadian and Alberta politics for various local, national, and international print and broadcast news outlets that include Calgary Herald, Leader Post, Vancouver Sun, Windsor Star, National Post, Radio-Canada International, Radio-Canada, CTV News, Sun TV, and RDI.

Click for a high-res photo.



Feedback:

  • RE: Quebec Shouldn’t be Given its Gun Registry Data — September 21, 2012

    This column was an eye-opener. Not so much for Navarro-Genie's gun registry argument, but for the examples he gave of the intrusion of the Quebec government in people's lives.

    I was aware of the requirement of women to maintain their maiden names upon marriage, but had forgotten, or was un-aware that, among other restrictions, all housing leases must expire at the same time, and that state permission must be sought in naming a child, or to send one to a non-French school. Top it off with the edict that all outdoor commercial signs must be exclusively in French and you have, I believe, the most totalitarian, intrusive regime in Canada.

    As with all of their entrenched information-gathering systems already in place, the gun registry in-formation is merely another nail in the coffin for individual freedom in that sad imitation of a democracy.

    Eric Hindson, Calgary

  • RE: Quebec Shouldn’t be Given its Gun Registry Data — September 21, 2012

    Question:   Why do you care if Quebec keeps registering long guns, you are in Calgary, does it really affect you?  The majority of Canadian's wanted to keep the registry.

    Honestly, I'd be perfectly content if Alberta was the one to leave the country.  You can take Stephen Hitler with you, and continue to ruin your local environment with all the tar sands production and those ugly tailing ponds.  Email from William Groombridge



Dams & Transmission Lines: Are There Responsible Alternatives? with Ed Schreyer, Former Governor General of Canada & Premier of Manitoba - June 25, 2013


Upcoming Events

Dams & Transmission Lines: Are There Responsible Alternatives?
with Ed Schreyer, Former Governor General of Canada & Premier of Manitoba
June 25, 2013 — Winnipeg

Future Solutions for Retirement Security & Pensions
with The Honourable Ted Menzies
June 27, 2013 — Calgary


Basic Math

Upcoming FCPP Appearances

Watch for more appearances soon - to book a Frontier speaker for your community club or organization contact newideas@fcpp.org


Tue June 18, 2013

Link to Prairie Weather


SymbolCurrent Price
Canadian $0.9803
US $1.0201
S&P/TSX12288.90
Dow Jones13147.18
NASDAQ3423.555
Oil94.65
Uranium40.10
Potash40.56