I live-tweeted it, sort of.
After sponsor Cathay Wagantall blathered on about how carefully her bill was written to ensure it had zero zip nada effect on abortion -- choking up theatrically in the process -- Bill (The Liar) Blair, former top cop in Toronto and now MP and parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Justice, spoke.
Blair pointed out that judges have, and have used, discretion in applying Canada's sensible notion of "aggravating factors" in sentencing people who assault or kill pregnant people. In other words, this bill is not necessary.
Blair: focus on domestic violence. (I'm hating this. Why couldn't some other Lib be saying this stuff.) #c225— Fern Hill (@fernhilldammit) May 2, 2016
After Blair, Murray Rankin (NDP), David Graham (LPC), and Sheila Malcolmson (NDP) stated their opposition to the bill. All pointed to the need for more focus on domestic violence.
Fetus freaks and CPC MPs, Michael Cooper and Garnett Genuis (corrected name; thanks to Joyce in the comments) spoke in favour, mainly whingeing about "justice," which we know means "vengeance" in these people's mouths.
So, with the Liberals and NDP opposed, there is no chance C225 will pass.
On Twitter, I tried to engage supporters (who were using the hashtag #MollyMatters) to answer my question: How exactly does adding a charge for harming or killing a fetus "protect" anyone?
More blathering about justice, but the nearest I got to a coherent answer was "deterrence."
Problem with that is deterrence doesn't work to prevent crime.
Underlying #C225 is the nonsensical notion that person contemplating violence says to self: "Whoa, extra charge for pregnancy! Better not!"— Fern Hill (@fernhilldammit) May 2, 2016
There will be more debate and a vote, but C225 is dead as a doornail.
Previous posts on C225:
Exploiting Grief to Attack Abortion Rights
Vengeance--and More--Drives "Unborn Victims" Law
Nope, This "Preborn Victims" Law Won't Pass Either.