DFAIT Gun Grabbers trying to redefine "small arms, light weapons"?

While the definition of small arms and light weapons has had various interpretations, the typical definition has been consistent with the following, from this Department Of Foreign affairs and International Trade website (from 2003, last updated 2005):

Small arms and light weapons have been defined in various ways in various fora, but are understood to include weapons that are designed to military specifications to be used either by an individual or a crew as lethal instruments of combat. It is generally accepted that " small arms and light weapons" include such weapons as fully automatic assault rifles, light and heavy machine guns, grenades and their launchers, small caliber mortars and shoulder fired anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles. Although many kinds of firearms are routinely used by military forces, such as pistols, revolvers, and semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, these kinds of weapons are not normally categorized as being small arms and light weapons[emphasis added].

The most recent website from DFAIT, for the UN small arms conference, provides the following definition:

Though there is no universally agreed definition of small arms and light weapons, it is commonly accepted that they include the following:

Small Arms: weapons designed for individual use such as revolvers and self-loading pistols, rifles and carbines, sub-machine guns, assault rifles and light machine guns.[emphasis added]

Light Weapons: weapons designed for use by two or three persons serving as crew, although some may be carried and used by a single person. They include, inter alia, heavy machine guns, hand-held under-barrel and mounted grenade launchers, portable anti-aircraft guns, portable anti-tank guns, recoilless rifles, portable launchers of anti-tank missile and rocket systems, portable launchers of anti-aircraft missile systems, and mortars of a calibre of less than 100 millimetres.

The second definition is much more expansive, intentionally, and is consistent with that of NGOs like IANSA, Oxfam international, and others. The intent, of course, it to fold those firearms typically owned and held by civilians into the broader program to control "small arms". The first definition clearly targets those firearms designed and built for a military purpose, while the second includes all handheld firearms.

The first definition comes from a website no longer referenced on the DFAIT website, although it still exists on the server. This change occurred not long before the ramp-up to the conference began. In fact, the policy on conventional weapons no longer is accessible from the DFAIT website - only the conference viewpoint.

Peter Mackay needs to be asked whether the Conservative Party has in fact advanced the stated goals of the previous Liberal government in this arena, or are his department bureaucrats out of control, still setting public policy for Canada based on their own liberal bias.

U.N. Small Arms Conference Ends Without Agreement

General Assembly, United Nations
July 7, 2006

DC/3037
Department of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York

Review Conference on Illicit Small Arms Trade

13th & 14th Meetings (AM & PM)

UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE AIMED AT STRENGTHENING GLOBAL EFFORT AGAINST ILLICIT SMALL ARMS TRADE ENDS WITHOUT AGREEMENT ON FINAL DOCUMENT

President Says Action Plan Validity, Effectiveness Undiminished;

Canada Calls for Informal Meeting in 2007 to Accelerate Implementation

The first Conference to review an ambitious 2001 Programme of Action to control the illicit trade in small arms ended this evening without agreement on a formal outcome document, thus failing to provide the General Assembly with either a mandate to conduct a further review in five years, or guidance on future implementation.

The Programme of Action, which had been endorsed by United Nations Member States in 2001, had provided for the convening of a Review Conference by the General Assembly no later than 2006, to assess progress in implementing the action plan. It had also provided for biennial meetings of States to consider national, regional and global implementation, which would go forward as previously agreed.

Establishing a global framework for curbing the illicit trade in small arms, the action plan contained substantial agreed norms and programmes on several issues, including preventing and combating the illicit production and trafficking of small arms and light weapons; ensuring effective controls of the legal production of those weapons; their holding and transfer; weapons collection and destruction; and the control of those arms in post-conflict situations. National strategies, which had been an important result of the 2001 Conference, were in varying stages of implementation, but they had emerged as a key focus for increased global assistance.

Asserting that the real victims of the outcome tonight were the millions of people around the world dying daily from small arms violence, Finland’s speaker, on behalf of the European Union, said he “deplored the lack of progress on the priority areas”, as well as on issues such as the role of civil society, civilian possession, gender issues, stockpiles management, man-portable air defence systems (MANPADS), and the human rights aspects of the illicit use of small arms. Following adoption of the Conference’s procedural report, he said the Conference had missed an opportunity to “make a real difference in the common fight against this scourge”, owing to the unwillingness of some delegations to make significant progress. He also regretted that civil society’s momentum had not been matched by the will of States.

Canada’s representative, confident that the General Assembly would see the merit of continuing with a formal follow-on to the Conference, said that, although he would have preferred a formal mandate from the Conference, Canada would seek to convene an informal intercessional meeting of States to discuss concrete measures to accelerate implementation. That meeting would be held in Geneva in the spring or autumn of 2007, and be one week in duration. It would focus on transfer controls, the specific refinement of global principles and resource mobilization. It would be funded on a voluntary basis by States in a position to do so, and all relevant United Nations agencies, international and regional organizations, and non-governmental organizations would be invited to attend as observers, and be welcome to contribute to specific discussions in an advisory capacity.

Also deeply regretting that the Conference had not reached agreement, particularly on a blueprint for its follow-up, Iran’s speaker said, however, that that should not be seen as a failure of will to follow-up on the 2001 Plan. States could decide to hold biennial meetings and the General Assembly could decide to hold another five-year review, if it so wished. “See you in 2008,” he added.

Kenya’s representative said that his delegation had sincerely hoped for progress, particularly because his region continued to suffer the impact of the illegal small arms trade. But, the fact that delegations had refused to budge from their positions, had led to the Conference’s failure. Kenya would continue to work on the issue -- within its region and beyond -- for it was too important a subject to be left unaddressed. It would continue to pursue the matter in the Assembly.

The representative of the United States said the lack of consensus would in no way impact on his country’s commitment to implement the Programme or offer assistance, and it would not shirk from its duty in the area, particularly transport controls, marking and tracing, and export controls, among others. The United States would continue its assistance to States seeking to implement the Programme. It had expanded such assistance every year since 2001, and intended to expand its efforts in Africa and Eastern Europe, among other regions. His country would also continue to help countries facing the lethal consequences of illicit trade in small arms.

If “push comes to shove”, said Sierra Leone’s speaker, the issues debated here would be voted upon. “We shall not depend on this concept of consensus, which, in my view, has been used as a weapon to destroy the work that we have done, the work that you have done, and all that we have put in,” he said. He looked forward to the session of the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security), and, “if we have to vote, we will vote, and make sure we save the people -- the children -- who are suffering from the use of these illicit weapons.”

Conference President, Prasad Kariyawasam ( Sri Lanka), said that an agreed final document had been “within grasp”, but, ultimately, it had been impossible to conclude it. In the final analysis, however, the Action Programme had remained an enabling framework that empowered States, global and regional organizations, and civil society to work for its full and effective implementation. Its validity and effectiveness remained undiminished; it was a living document. In the action plan, the international community shared a common blueprint of what needed to be done and how to achieve the objectives. Not having a final document at the Conference had not altered the resolve to confront the scourge of the illicit trade in small arms. Furthermore, the Conference had attracted unprecedented global attention, and everyone had been enriched by the contributions made to advance the issue.

Opening briefly this morning in a formal meeting, delegations adopted the draft resolution recommended by the Credentials Committee, containing credentials of representatives of the States to the Conference (document A/CONF.192/2006/RC/8).

Closing remarks were also made by the representatives of Indonesia (on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement), India, Argentina (on behalf of the Southern Common Market), Barbados (on behalf of the Caribbean Community), Saudi Arabia (on behalf of the Arab Group), Colombia, Mexico, Cuba, Japan, Guatemala, Mali, Niger, Australia, Pakistan, France, Liberia, Israel and Egypt. Additional speakers delivered their statements in their national languages after interpretation services had ended at 6:15 p.m.

The right to bear arms and strawberry flavoured liquorice shoelaces - a parable

You might ask, what on earth does the right to bear arms have to do with candy?  The answer may be "the survival of a nation".  Tom Utley in the Daily Mail in England writes of a manuscript he received, entitled "The Icon of St. Elias". The futuristic story is an ideological remake of George Orwell's "1984".
Utley hasn't had to look too far to find the precursors of such a future in the Government of Britain's plan to establish a $500 million database on the life history of all its nation's 12 million children. From Mr. Utley:

Among other things, the Children's Index will record whether a child's parents are providing a 'positive role model', how the child is performing at school — and even whether youngsters are eating the daily five portions of fruit and vegetables recommended by the Government.

Presumably, children will be questioned at school each morning on what their parents fed them the night before.

The database, we are told, will be made available to social workers, teachers and doctors, who will have the power to flag up 'concerns' when they think that children are not meeting the criteria laid down by the state.

This really is frightening stuff: an administration gone absolutely berserk with power. What earthly business is it of this government — or any future one — what my children eat, at my kitchen table, in my house?

If I sound nervous, that is because there was a time about six years ago when our youngest — 13 today — would eat almost nothing but strawberry-flavoured liquorice shoelaces, HAP (honey and peanut butter) sandwiches and packets of crisps. How would that look on the Children's Index?

Oh, Patricia Hewitt — dear, sweet, kind Secretary of State for Health — I promise you that we tried to make him eat up his greens. He just wouldn't. Please don't take him away from us.

I have other worries, too, which make me dread the arrival of a phalanx of social workers at my door, to condemn me as a lousy 'role model' and march my boys into care.

Those who have followed the development of social control laws in Britain should be squirming over the eminent sense such a program makes to the parliamentary machinery currently held in a headlock by liberal nanny-statists "over 'ome". To continue from Mr. Utley:

But there is a very serious point to all this. This new computer database is part of the Government's response to the heart-rending tragedy that befell eight-year-old Victoria Climbie, who died in 2000 after being treated with appalling cruelty by her great aunt.

The idea of the Children's Index, says the Government, is to act as an early warning system to identify children at risk.

But this completely misses the point of what went wrong in Victoria's case. It wasn't that nobody alerted the authorities to her plight. On the contrary, police, doctors and social workers all had contact with her during her abuse — in which she suffered no fewer than 128 injuries.

They were alerted in the time-honoured way — not by a computer, but by good-natured and public-spirited people, who noticed that something was terribly wrong with the way the poor child was being treated.

Mr. Utley predicts, given the reality that the state makes a lousy parent, that the "Children's Index will not save a single child's life".

But where's the hook to gun-loving Americans, you ask? The much vaunted Gun Registry in Canada was regularly touted as a necessary social database and tool to protect Canadians from the "abuses" of firearms owners in Canada, who apparently had been running roughshod over women and children for decades, but doing it so clandestinely that practically nobody noticed. At least, not until the Coalition for Gun Control and Al Rock and the Liberal Party declared a public disaster and proceeded to produce the Canadian equivalent of the Children's Index for gun owners. "If it only saves one life" became, and still is, the mantra of those nanny-statists who continue to believe that Canada remains in the grip of rampaging firearms owners just waiting for the opportunity to kill, and kill again (don't believe this? Spend some quality time with the so-called mayor of Toronto, David Miller).

Fast forward to this past, and next, week. The world's avowed nannyists are currently meeting at the United Nations to review the protocol on illicit trade in firearms. Many statist representatives and NGOs want the protocol process to expand and continue through to at least 2012. While Kofi Annan, the General Secretary of the U.N., states in his lead remarks on the website that the program is not intended to target civilian ownership of firearms, it should be clear that that is exactly who it is aimed at. Couched in phraseology aimed at preventing the flow of military weapons between non-state combatants, it really is about preventing citizens from being armed. After all, that is who and where these firearms go to.

A review of the intervenor list will clearly show two distinct groups: the civilian organizations who represent the belief that citizens must maintain the right to civilian arms ownership, and those organizations who are dedicated to removal of all firearms from any but state hands. It is strategic that many of the latter groups represent victimization. It has been long a tactic of nanny-statists to foster guilt in those they wish to control.

Of the nations lining up to support and continue the protocol, are a veritable who's who of states with known histories of totalitarian and human rights abuses, and those with bureaucracies committed to the nanny-state dogma. Canada, despite a change in government, remains front and centre in promoting the belief that an armed citizenry is bad for governance, and its mission continues to promote the previous Liberal government's agenda of citizen and victim disarmament.

The United States, because of their constitutionally entrenched right to maintain a civilian check on governmental power, by force, if necessary, have said, flatly, no - any move to limit the guarantees in the Second Amendment will not fly. History is replete with examples of states and despots who, in the name of "peace and good government", have supported disarmament of civilians. Genocide has occasionally been the consequence.

There is no doubt that the ravages of civil war and anarchy take a toll on soldiers and civilians alike. But freedom and democracy sometimes demand, and exact, a heavy toll in the fight against those who would take them away. Make no mistake, there is no democracy in an autocratic nanny-state. At the U.N., there are many state governments who are using the nanny-state NGOs to legitimize the disarmament of their citizens (there are now so many NGOs, that the U.N. could quite correctly be called the U.NGO.).

As the world moves toward overpopulation and critical resource depletion, survival of a nation will depend on its ability to defend itself, and ultimately, for its citizens to defend themselves, in order to defend their nation.

Working paper submitted by Canada - Intersessional Programme Proposal

Proposal for an intersessional programme of work to enhance implementation of the United Nations Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Lights Weapons in All Its Aspects

Foreword
During the meeting of the Preparatory Committee for the Conference to Review Progress made in the Implementation of the Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects held in New York from 9 to 20 January 2006, Canada tabled a working paper outlining a proposal for an intersessional programme of work to complement work carried out during formal meetings of States. There was significant interest in the proposal and several States and civil society organizations requested additional information concerning how such an intersessional process might be undertaken. The present paper further elaborates the essential ideas advanced in the original working paper and reflects many of the comments and suggestions received from States and non-governmental organizations during the meeting of the Preparatory Committee. Canada will continue to consult widely in an effort to further refine the proposal for consideration at the review Conference.

The full text [pdf] is here.

Canada's Amb. Laurin's Opening Remarks - UN-SALW

STATEMENT BY AMBASSADOR GILBERT LAURIN
DEPUTY PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF CANADA
TO THE UNITED NATIONS

TO THE OPENING OF THE UN CONFERENCE TO REVIEW PROGRESS MADE IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAMME OF ACTION TO PREVENT, COMBAT AND ERADICATE THE ILLICIT TRADE IN SMALL ARMS AND LIGHT WEAPONS IN ALL ITS ASPECTS AT THE SIXTIETH SESSION OF THE UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY NEW YORK, 26 JUNE 2006


Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations • Mission permanente du Canada auprès des Nations Unies
885 Second Avenue, 14th Floor • New York, N.Y. 10017 • Telephone (212) 848-1100 • Facsimile (212) 848-1195
http://www.un.int/canada

Let me begin, Mr. President, by extending, on behalf of the Canadian delegation, our warm congratulations on your election as President of this Review Conference.

Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

We are brought together on this landmark occasion by tragedy aid by hope.

Tragedy, because in excess of three hundred and fifty thousand people each year fall victim to the misuse of small arms and light weapons ; an average of 1,000 every day.

Hope, because we are well placed, both during and following this Conference, to advance significantly the implementation of the Programme of Action, to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects.

I take this opportunity to highlight specific measures that Canada regards as priorities, measures which we pledge to pursue energetically in cooperation with other nations and civil society .

Mr. President, we must continue to strengthen the global regulatory framework governing small arms transfers in order to combat the illicit flow of small arms and light weapons, while at the same time, respecting the legitimate interests of lawful firearms producers, exporters, retailers and owners.

In this regard, Canada welcomes the imminent establishment of the Group of Governmental Experts on brokering, and hopes that the work of the Group can get underway as soon as possible .

Canada supports the development of global principles that will guide the transfer of small arms and light weapons throughout their active life .

Canada is also supportive, in principle, of a comprehensive, legally binding Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) that would cover all conventional arms, which prevents the illicit flow of arms to conflict zones .

We commend the excellent work to date of civil society and the government of the United Kingdom on the ATT initiative, and pledge to work closely with all involved to advance the early development and adoption of this important instrument.

Mr. President, we must reduce the misuse of small arms and light weapons by civilians, as civilians possess more than 60% of the world's 600 million or more small arms . Most are used responsibly for hunting or target shooting. Others are used for illicit purposes.

Tremendous gains can be made by States through simple measures such as the implementation of a licensing regime that establishes clear criteria for the lawful ownership and use of firearms. These criteria should include establishing a reasonable minimum age so as to keep guns out of the hands of children, ensuring that prospective owners and users are screened for a history of violence or criminal activity and ensuring as well, that each individual possesses a basic knowledge of firearms safety.

Each State must also ensue the appropriate use of small arms and light weapons by state officials and security agents. In this regard, Canada urges the establishment and enforcement of standards for the issue and use of firearms by police and state security officials and agents that reflect the United Nations Basic
Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement officials.

We must ensure that essential stocks of small arms and light weapons remain secure and that surplus stocks are safely disposed of. To this end, Canada would welcome the further sharing of information on best practices in this and related areas ... the provision of technical and financial assistance where
required.

In addition to matters related to the `supply' of small arms and light weapons, it is important to identify factors that lead to the demand for such weapons for illicit purposes. It is equally important to support initiatives that will effectively address the demand for small arms within the broader national and international, political, social, economic, and cultural contexts.

Since young men continue to be the main perpetrators and victims of gun violence, our analysis should include gender considerations.

It is also critically important that we meet the physical and psychological needs of the survivors of armed violence, and ensure that they are reintegrated into their societies as full, productive members.

Where appropriate, small arms and light weapons programming should be mainstreamed into the national development plans and strategies of developing countries and the international development community, including the World Bank, Regional Development Banks, relevant UN agencies, Official
Development Assistance agencies and development NGOs.

But none of this will occur, Mr. President, if we do not accord small arms and light weapons issues the time and attention they warrant.

Participants may recall that during the Preparatory Committee Meeting in January, Canada submitted a Working Paper proposing adoption at this Review Conference of an Intersessional Program of Work that would bring us together informally on a semi-annual basis to generate ideas for consideration of States during subsequent formal meetings. As such they would be complementary to formal meetings of States.

Among other things, this would afford greater opportunity for focussed, results oriented work on various thematic priorities and to develop and implement a strategy to raise the resources required to fully implement the Programme of Action.

Canada has submitted for the consideration of this Conference, a new working paper that further elaborates this proposal.

Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen, the Programme of Action adopted in 2001 is a valuable framework agreement. Let us use it and our collective experience over the past five years to guide our deliberations in order that the work we undertake during this Conference and in years to come fulfils the promise of the Programme of Action.

Thank you.

Small Arms, Light Weapons - Kofi get your gun?...

For an in-depth look at the United Nations Conference to Review Progress Made in the Implementation of the Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat, and Irradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in all its Aspects, New York, 26 june -7 July, 2006, follow the conference link.

General Assembly
DC/3027
Department of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York

Background Release

Major review at United Nations to assess progress made, actions needed to further stem illegal small arms trade



NEW YORK, 20 June -- Five years after the adoption of the United Nations Programme of Action to address the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons, some 2,000 representatives from Governments, international and regional organizations and civil society will meet at United Nations Headquarters from 26 June to 7 July 2006 to review progress made; toaddress future cooperation and activities; and toassess challenges on the road ahead.

By unanimously adopting the Programme of Action in 2001, the United Nations Member States committed themselves to collecting and destroying illegal weapons, adopting and/orimproving national legislation to help criminalize the illicit trade in small arms, regulating the activities of brokers, setting strict import andexport controls, taking action against violators of such laws, and better coordinating international efforts to that end.

The small arms Review Conference should reinforce the momentum for action among Member States, civil society, international and regional organizations. The Conference is also expected to welcome the establishment of a group of governmental experts who will meet in November 2006 to tackle the issue of reining in illegal arms brokers.

“The Conference offers an opportunity for all countries to review their pledges to get rid of illegal trade in small arms and, for this purpose, to develop a strategy for further implementation of the UN Programme of Action, agreed in 2001”, stated the President-designate of the small arms Review Conference, Ambassador Prasad Kariyawasam, Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the United Nations in New York.

Since its adoption, the Programme of Action has stimulated a wide range of initiatives at the national, regional and global levels, such as:

-- More than 50 countries have strengthened their national legislation to control the illegal trade in small arms, including Argentina, Brazil, Cambodia, Germany, Mauritius, Nicaragua, South Africa and the United Kingdom. Similar reforms are under way in many other countries.

-- In Africa, where illegal small arms have been used to kill directly or indirectly hundreds of thousands of people in conflict zones, three legally-binding agreements have been developed to address this issue and to focus on the humanitarian impact: the “Nairobi Protocol” on firearms, covering East Africa and the Great Lakes Region; a Southern African Development Community (SADC) Protocol covering Southern Africa; and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) Convention on Importation and Manufacture of Light Weapons.

-- More than 60 countries have collected and destroyed large amounts of illegal small arms. Different methods have been used, including by “Flames of Peace” bonfires (Burundi, Cambodia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ghana, Haiti, Rwanda, Senegal, South Africa); by crushing them with steamrollers, bulldozers or tanks (Brazil, former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Paraguay, Sri Lanka); by dismantling weapons (Argentina, Costa Rica, Timor-Leste, Uganda); by discarding in deep water (Senegal and others). Other cost-effective and environment-friendly methods have also been used.

-- United Nations peacekeeping operations have developed and implemented disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programmes in post-conflict situations, especially in Africa, helping thousands of former combatants (including women and children) disarm and return to civilian life in countries such as Burundi, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Liberia and Sierra Leone. United Nations Country Teams have also carried out disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programmes in Cambodia, Central African Republic and Guinea Bissau.

-- The General Assembly adopted in December 2005 the International Instrument to Enable States to Identify and Trace, in a Timely and Reliable Manner, Illicit Small Arms and Light Weapons. This new instrument will help law enforcement officials identify sources of illegal weapons. In a recent report, Secretary-General Kofi Annan called this the most significant United Nations achievement in 2005 in fighting the illicit trade in small arms.

-- The United Nations Protocol against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Their Parts and Components and Ammunition came into force in July 2005 as the first legally-binding global instrument on small arms which aims at strengthening cooperation among States to combat illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms. The Firearms Protocol supplements the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and is expected to become a useful tool for law enforcement in the countries that ratified it.

Since 2001, the United Nations Programme of Action has brought about some significant developments in combating the illicit trade in small arms, concludes the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research in a study on national implementation. “However, much still remains to be done”, it states, “to prevent illicit small arms from causing more devastating tragedies.”

The Small Arms Survey, a Geneva-based independent research institute, estimated that the number of deaths caused by small arms used in conflicts worldwide to have been between 80,000 and 108,000 (in 2003). The Survey reports that at least 200,000 non-conflict-related small arms deaths occur each year, many of them by illegal small arms.

The United Nations Programme of Action covers the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons, which fuels armed conflicts and supports the activities of groups involved in organized crime, trafficking in drugs and the illegal exploitation and trade of precious minerals.

The Review Conference will not be negotiating any treaty to prohibit citizens of any country from possessing firearms or to interfere with the legal trade in small arms and lights weapons.

Press Contact: François Coutu, United Nations Department of Public Information, Peace and Security Section, tel.: 1-917-367-9322, e-mail: coutu@un.org.

Conference website: http://www.un.org/smallarms2006/.

For media accreditation, please consult the United Nations Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit’s website: http://www.un.org/media/accreditation/.

CILA EMERGENCY ACTION ALERT

UPDATE: While the conference concluded without a resolution in regard to SALW, Canada's Department of External Affairs continues to promote the Liberal agenda of ending civilian ownership of firearms. Its still important to contact Minister Mckay (below) to tell him that a) you will not stand for the disarmament of civilians, and, b) demand that he take control of his department so that it may reflect true Canadian values and not the agenda of the Liberal Party of Canada.

From the Canadian Shooting Sports Association / Canadian Institute for Legislative Action at the UN Small Arms and Light Weapons Conference:

"Shooters of Canada:

We need your immediate assistance at the United Nations. While the Americans have drawn some hard lines in the sand regarding civilian firearms ownership, the Canadian delegation is spouting “weasel words” to try and placate European interests without appearing hostile towards our southern neighbours.

Despite numerous communications from CILA to Foreign Affairs… OUR LONG TERM INTERESTS ARE BEING SOLD OUT.

We need you to write immediately to the PMO and Foreign Affairs. SEND IT BY FAX

Tell them we want the Canadian government to order the Delegation to stop paying lip service to firearms owners, respect the statement made by Canadian Ambassador Laurin and to publicly include language in their statements that respects our rights. Tell them you support the American position to lawful private firearms ownership from the Conference mandate, that ammunition MUST not be added to the discussion and that the Canadian government recognizes the legitimacy of sport shooting and private firearms ownership. In addition, tell them the American position, that this is to be the last global Small Arms Conference, is a responsible use of our tax dollars and you support it.

DO THIS NOW! There are only a few days left to achieve these goals and if you delay, all of us are in grave jeopardy.

Circulate this to everyone and get them to act IMMEDIATELY.

The Right Honourable Stephen Harper Fax: (613) 941-6900
The Honourable Peter Mackay, Minister of Foreign Affairs Fax: (613) 992-2337"

Tony Bernardo
Executive Director - CILA
1-888-873-4339
abernardo343@rogers.com



Backgrounder:


May 10, 2006

Professor Gary Mauser wrote Kevin Sorenson, MP, Chair of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development about Canada's National Committee on Small Arms and Light Weapons (SALWs) at the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT).

Mauser writes:
I recently attended a meeting of the Canadian National Committee on Small Arms and Light Weapons (SALWs) at Foreign Affairs Canada and was shocked at what I was told.

I am writing to ask that you review the attached report before it is presented to the United Nations in June.

The chair of this committee, Earl Turcotte, reported that, even though they do not have a mandate from the new Conservative government, they intend to continue acting as if they had.

The Canadian National Committee on SALW has spent tens of millions of dollars - possibly hundreds of millions -- on a large number of vague "feel good" projects around the world. At least 24 different international programs and initiatives are listed as being funded or largely funded by them. (These are listed in the Report appended to this letter).

The SALW Committee is downplaying the importance of evaluating the effectiveness of these projects in attaining their stated goals of reducing terrorism, criminal violence or suicide. There is no convincing empirical support for the success of these projects.

Apparently, one of the primary goals of this committee, set by the previous government, is to embarrass the United States at the United Nations. I hope that a Conservative government would wish to stop supporting a committee that purposefully undermines the government's stated aims of improving relations with the United States.

Mr. Turcotte stated that the United Nations mandate for the 2001 "Program of Action on SALWs" expires this year, and it needs to be renewed for the Canadian National Committee on SALW to continue. If the Conservatives act quickly it may be possible to stop this Liberal boondoggle in Foreign Affairs..

Another goal of this committee is to urge the United Nations to abandon the practice of decision-making by consensus that currently exists in UN committees. Given that a small minority of countries pays the bills at the UN, the United States strongly opposes such an irresponsible practice.

I would ask that you review the CANADIAN REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS PROGRAMME OF ACTION TO PREVENT, COMBAT AND ERADICATE THE ILLICIT TRADE IN SMALL ARMS AND LIGHT WEAPONS IN ALL ITS ASPECTS before it is presented to the United Nations in late June.