Well it looks like Prime Minister Stephen and the Conservative Party wants to re-open an issue that was closed long ago in Canada: the debate over abortion. It appears they didn't get the memo that Canadians don't want this issue re-opened. With his government consistently hovering around the low 30s in opinion polls, Harper has probably decided that this would be a good move to make for his and his party's base. The prime minister has also concluded that he knows how Canadians want their tax dollars spent on overseas humanitarian missions or foreign aid, and that we apparently don't want foreign aid spent on abortions and birth control but rather less polarizing forms of advocating maternal health. Yesterday Harper said in Parliament:
Canadians want to see their foreign aid money used for things that will help save the lives of women and children in ways that unite the Canadian people rather than divide them.We understand that other governments, that other taxpayers, may do something different. We want to make sure our funds are used to save the lives of women and children and are used on the many, many things that are available to us that frankly do not divide the Canadian population.
Sorry Steve, but abortion does not "divide the Canadian population". Perhaps it is a sticking point for the likes of yourself and your base, who feel that women should not have the right to decide what to do with their bodies. However the majority of the Canadian population feels much differently. According to an Angus Reid poll conducted back in June 2008, 65% of Canadians favoured of abortion rights for women, with 49% believing that the procedure should be allowed in all cases, and with 19% favouring more restrictions, but still supporting the procedure.
Regardless, Harper's statement was the most confrontational yet from the Conservative government on its refusal to fund access to safe abortions as part of its G8 project on child and maternal health. Harper made the statement as G8 development ministers and their representatives sat at a Halifax table, who were considerate enough to avoid the issue. London North Centre Liberal MP Glen Pearson, the opposition critic for international cooperation, who was invited to the working sessions said:
The word abortion never came up once, although there was a bit of talk . . . that each country has to recognize the political difficulties each would have in its own country.
Pearson further commented that real challenge facing G8 nations, as opposed to the abortion issue, was the flux in public opinion in those countries for supporting foreign aid, who also have different approaches to health care and determining results:
That could be veiled and (abortion) could be in there, but it was never overt, it was never said. But the idea that we do have to be flexible to other countries with their various needs was obviously there, because they all have different protocols. So part of what was said was ‘Look, we all have our different ways of approaching things, but how do we then end up with what we say we are looking for at the G8?
At a news conference yesterday, International Cooperation Minister Bev Oda included the chief administrator at the U.S. Agency for International Development, Rajiv Shah, tried to side step the issue and avoid abortion discussion by insisting that Canada and America agree on a definition of family planning which promotes control over childbearing timing, that includes the use of contraceptives, but which doesn't include abortion. But in March, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke firmly regarding that it's necessary for governments to not be partisan and ideological on the issue of assisting women in developing countries receive safe abortions. However as we know, people like Harper and his base don't care about women having control over their bodies. Shah, repesenting the Obama Administration, did state that:
We know that when we have effective family planning programs we reduce the numbers of both unwanted pregnancies and abortions that are in play, that when people use unsafe abortions, that is technically a cause of maternal mortality.
Shah added that the Obama administration revoked a Bush Administraiton policy to cut support for abortion aid, but copped out when asked if America's position was in stark contrast to that of the Canadian Conservative government.
Oda actually had the nerve to suggest that Canadian governments had never funded any procedure which included abortion: "Canada has never funded a procedure that included abortion". Wrong. Since the mid-80s, the federal government has given funds to the pro-choice International Planned Parenthood Federation, who are still waiting if they will receive a renewed grant from the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), which concludded last December. Asked specifically about this matter, groups that included abortion and were funded by the CIDA, Oda said: "Canada will honour its current commitments with all organizations to undertake all the activities it has."
A spokesman for CIDA, Scott Cantin, contradicted Oda:
CIDA does not fund any project specifically aimed at increasing the availability of abortion. In keeping with existing international agreements, the Government of Canada does not promote abortion as a means of family planning, either domestically or internationally.
Opposition international cooperation critic Pearson also said yesterday that despite the vague wording of discussions at the Halifax working sesssions table, his previous discussion with the participants and delegates, which included CIDA experts, involved a lot of questions about the motivations and details, and concluded that: "This is a political announcement". No kidding, Glen.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.