Velcro government: stuck with it
Public Safety Minister Vic Toews said today that all the records of the gun registry are being destroyed for one reason -- to thwart future, more gun-registry-friendly governments.
“We won’t have these records loose and capable then of creating a new long gun registry should they ever have the opportunity to do that,” ” said Public Safety Minister Vic Toews at a news conference at an Ottawa valley farm.
All day, I've been trying to figure out why this has been nagging at me. Is there anything wrong about that? Turns out I've also got the words of Stephen Harper -- yes, the Prime Minister -- stuck in my head. From last week, in the House of Commons:
Mr. Speaker, the law of our constitutional system is extremely clear. A previous government cannot bind a future government to its policy.
Yes, that's an argument in favour of scrapping a policy of a previous government, but it seems to me it's also an argument for not thwarting a future one. And yes, it should also remind you of Tom Flanagan's candour of a few years ago, about why it was a good idea for the Conservatives to run up deficits. It was about "tightening the screws" on successors.
"They've gradually re-engineered the system. I'm quite impressed with it,'' said Flanagan, who ran the 2004 Conservative campaign and has been a longtime confidant and former chief of staff to Harper.
"They're boxing in the ability of the federal government to come up with new program ideas . . . The federal government is now more constrained, the provinces have more revenue, and conservatives should be happy.''
Guess that's good news for all of you out there who aren't crazy about voting. Elect this government, determine policy for many governments afterward. It's not democracy, or even constitutional, if I hear Harper correctly, but it is efficient.