PUBLICATION:              Toronto Star

DATE:              2004.05.20

SECTION:                     News

PAGE:                          A02

BYLINE:                        Tonda MacCharles

ILLUSTRATION:           Liberal MP Marlene Jennings says changes would be popular with majority of Canadians. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Liberals set sights on gun registry rules

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OTTAWA - The federal government will eliminate gun registration fees and bring in changes today that it says will better control costs of the $1-billion program while getting tougher on gun crimes. The measures, to be announced just days before the federal Liberals are expected to hit the campaign trail, do not go as far as many critics wanted.

But the government hopes that what is being billed by insiders as "a major announcement on controlling costs" sends a clear signal it supports gun control and won't cut costs at the expense of losing ground in the fight against gun crime.

The federal cabinet rejected a recommendation by Associate Defence Minister Albina Guarnieri to effectively "de-criminalize" gun registration offences by removing them from the Criminal Code. Police will still retain the discretion to lay either charges under the Criminal Code or the Firearms Act.

"We're not gutting the gun law," said one source. "In fact, we're probably strengthening the tools and measures to say gun crime will not be tolerated."

The federal government is expected to:

Eliminate fees for the registration and transfer of firearms. It is not clear how much of a revenue drop this will be. Already, gun owners can register free online, or for a flat $18 fee if it's done on paper regardless of the number of guns that are registered. The federal government says most gun owners have already registered their firearms: 1.6 million firearm owners have at least one certificate in gun registry, with 6.8 million firearms registered.

This initiative is largely a goodwill measure, and it is hoped gun owners who have not yet registered in protest of fees will be encouraged to come forward.

Increase measures to combat smuggling by adding three new ballistic testing and information systems in Vancouver, Halifax and Regina. Three such systems already exist in Montreal, Ottawa and Toronto.

Tougher penalties for smuggling and trafficking crimes, including increasing the minimum one-year sentences to an as yet undetermined level for illegal weapons trafficking and possession for the purpose of trafficking.

Tougher Criminal Code penalties to deter possession of a loaded handgun in public places, a measure expected to go over well with law enforcement agencies battling gun crimes in urban areas like Toronto.

Direct judges to give special consideration in cases of domestic violence to issuing a prohibition order against owning a gun.

Re-commit funding for the National Weapons Enforcement Support Team, an integrated team of experts in gun smuggling and trafficking that help frontline officers in investigations.

"If those measures are indeed announced, I think those would be popular measures with the overwhelming majority of Canadians," said Liberal MP Marlene Jennings (Notre-Dame-de-Grace-Lachine), long a proponent of tough gun control.

She said the changes could expose those who have used the $1-billion cost overrun as an excuse for attacking the policy. "They just don't want gun control in the first place. And that's a minority of people."

But the changes are unlikely to deter Conservatives and gun control opponents from charging Liberals make criminals out of duck hunters and farmers.

Certainly, the changes appear insufficient to satisfy one of the Liberals' own internal critics Roger Gallaway.

"I think it's all tinkering," said Gallaway (Sarnia-Lambton) in an interview. "There is no reason to believe that tinkering with a system which is broken irreversibly is going to improve it by simply proposing a bunch of administrative changes." He questioned how program costs could be reduced if some fees are going to be eliminated. "If you're going to eliminate fees it's going to cost more money."