Ambrose went off message, it seems.

How can that be? Aren't ministers' scripts tightly controlled by the PMO?

The event was a statement from the minister for status of women, containing no program or funding announcement, and the news to emerge was that Ambrose said Ottawa is "looking at" amending the Criminal Code to include so-called honour crimes. She was asked if the government was considering such changes, and she replied that it was under consideration. "I'll say that it's something that we're looking at," she said. "Nothing more than that at this time." However, when contacted for more details about possible changes, a spokeswoman for the Department of Justice said in fact, that is not the case. "There are currently no plans to do that," said Pamela Stephens.

From here. Ambrose also encouraged the community groups she addressed to develop their own initiatives to prevent "honour crimes" and assist women and girls who are suffering abuse at home. She told groups to submit project proposals to the federal government, but she offered no specific details about funding parameters or criteria. It also appears from the text of her speech published here that Ambrose (or someone in the PMO) used the event as an opportunity to jab at progressives - who don't rationalize any form of violence against women.

These heinous acts cannot be justified by cultural relativism or excused under the guise of political correctness.

Who the hell does that? Certainly not feminists. There are however, rightwing christian cons who believe that violence against women is far worse when it's muslims who commit those criminal actions.

In reality, women who are murdered, stabbed, mutilated, sexually assaulted or permanently harmed by those enraged by their femaleness don't care what motivated their abusers. They simply want justice to be done.

Shrieeek!!! Where are the feminists???

Yesterday DAMMIT JANET! predicted that the Blogging Tories and other assorted Attack Parrots, acolytes and sycophants would chant, bleat and repeat, repeat, repeat the Speaking Points faxed to them by the ReformaTory spin doctors.

Today Canadian Cynic confirms that this is indeed the case in his blogpost Dear incredibly stupid Canadian conservatives.

The winning comment, indeed the observation that nails everything you ever wanted to know about Stevie Spiteful and his ReformaTory bullies' intrinsic approach to women in politics, belongs to sooey:

"I'm sure Feminists are to blame. After all, if there wasn't a Minister of State for the Status of Women, this never would have happened."

From the frying pan into the fire.

As always in the ReformaTories a.k.a. Regressive Conservatives' parallel universe, reason and logic are mere signposts on the road less traveled.

We find out from Canadian Cynic: Comedy writers to high alert! that Cheryl Gallant may replace Helena Guergis as the Minister of State for Status of Women Canada. We wrote about R.E.A.L. women's vendetta against her.

Cheryl Gallant is known to be, among many regressively conservative colleagues, as one of the most fundamentally religious and consequently anti-feminist and homophobic.

It would appear that Stevie was not amused by the groundswell and grassroots response to his comments about left-wing fringe groups. Mr Grudgie-Pants may think that appointing Gallant to this post will placate his party's rightwing base but this strategy cranks up the declaration of hostility on his side. We will continue to pay close attention to the machinations of Stevie and his Harpocrites.

Caught between the Devil and the deep blue v.

Shall we shed a tear for Helena Guergis? Should we have empathy for her extremely awkward position, vis-à-vis a female electorate that has not warmed up to Stephen Harper and his nouveau-Cons?

First: this strident, shrieeeking, incensed tirade in R.E.A.L. women of Canada's May / June newsletter.

One would think that elected conservatives would be able to resist the feminist ideology, which is a very leftist, Marxist, anti-family movement (see “Feminism in Canada” on our web site.) With the emotional appeal of portraying women as perpetual victims, the sisterhood seems able to convert even Conservative MP's who were elected to combat the nanny state as embodied by Liberal and Socialist NDP enthusiasts. For example, on the occasion of International Women's Day, March 8, 2009, the Minister for Status of Women Helena Guergis (CPC) confirmed that “Our Government increased funding to Status of Women programs by 42%, bringing it to its highest ever level....”. In response to a question from radical feminist MP Irene Matthyssen (London-Fanshaw, NDP) Guergis stated “I think the member will be pleased to know that the number of organizations now receiving funding through Status of Women has increased 69% (Hansard, February 2, 2009, page 223). In her address to the 53rd Session of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women, Minister Guergis stated, “I would like to commend the Secretary-General for his report and appreciate that he has recognized the multiple dimensions of the equal sharing of responsibilities between women and men, both in the home and outside of it.” What's the United Nations doing in the home?

It blathers venomously on and on and on in that vein.

Next: now there has to be a horse-and-pony show, arranged to placate "R.E.A.L womenists". How can the Con spinners and prevaricators hope to pull this off? Easy - by making pronouncements that somehow misrepresent the goals and the methods of the Regroupement des femmes de la région de Matane. This tactic should not be a surprise to anyone, especially to the usually savvy media. And then there were the Progressive Bloggers - some seemed unable to distinguish between the Cons' incoherent glurge and a well-designed feminist project.

Ah-ha. The other shoe dropped. It makes me wonder if the choice of projects are connected to the ridings they're in and how that plays into the Con strategy to capture women's votes.

Who will Harper try to please? The Devil (R.E.A.L. women of Canada) or the deep blue v. - a considerable demographic group of moderate (sometimes supportive of Liberals, sometimes supportive of the party previously known as the Progressive Conservatives) female electorate.

Say, wasn't there a "R.E.A.L womenist" who ran as a candidate for Harper's Cons in the last federal election? How did that work out for you, Stevie? Oops.

Those who might want to know more about the Con's attempt to co-opt and spin the Matane women's project could read the discussion at the Bread'n'Roses thread here.

Soccer Mom Budget

I have nothing against women who can afford to stay home and raise their kids, or those who can follow a successful career outside their home and afford a nanny or other costly daycare. However, they are not the majority of women.

The budget conjured up by Harper and Flaherty, under threat from a potential coalition government, does not address the needs of the most vulnerable, and that includes many Canadian women.

The income tax cuts will mostly help fairly affluent households. Upping the "baby bonus" amounts will not address the need of affordable day care and is just another perk for affluent households. Ditto for tax credits in support of kids' hockey camps and piano lessons. The "cottage deck" initiative does nothing to provide affordable housing for low income, fixed income, under-employed, unemployed and unable to work women across this country. There is also the failure to change Employment Insurance eligibility to provide income relief to many women who work in jobs that make them ineligible or hold onto part-time work that doesn't allow them to access the program.

I didn't expect better from Harper. Nor did I expect him to respect pay equity. You only have to look at the list of resolutions passed at the last Conservative Party convention to recognize how despised women's rights are in his party.

What really burns is to recognize that neither pay equity nor the failure to address the needs of the most vulnerable was not considered a "poison pill" by the official opposition.

Sadly, I was hoping that Ignatieff would prove me wrong and display some courage. Unfortunately, I was wrong. It seems that vulnerability is an abstract concept for this Ivy League "human rights" expert.

Thanks to the Regina Mom, who reminded many of us that Anita Neville is the LPC critic for Status of Women, I fired off this letter:

Dear Ms. Neville,

I live in a riding adjacent to yours so I am not writing as one of your constituents but as a concerned Canadian woman. I am writing to you today since you are the Liberal critic responsible for the status of women.

The budget presented by Harper's Conservative government is a failed attempt at addressing the severe recession we are entering. Mr. Ignatieff seems to recognize this but still insists on supporting it with the proviso of periodic report cards. This is a meaningless gesture that does nothing to protect the most vulnerable, which includes many women across Canada. This budget provides little of no relief for low income, single income, unemployed and working women.

Those who are fortunate enough to still have jobs need meaningful childcare supports, something former PM Martin recognized but didn't act upon fast enough. Those without jobs or earning low incomes need refundable tax credit mechanisms to supplement household income and not increases in income exemptions and bracketing that fail to provide women with non-taxable incomes little relief. Many of the women who will lose their jobs will not qualify for EI benefits based on the current system. And lose their jobs they will since most women are employed in the retail and services sectors (including health care) and the taxation and economic stimulus measures will not create very many opportunities or protect jobs in these sectors.

But what really galls me is that the Liberals have failed to demand a reversal of the government's attack on pay equity. We have known that this was on the table since Flaherty first presented his economic update in November. Failing to demand that this loathsome and regressive move be struck from the budget is reprehensible. While President Obama moves the US a step forward, PM Harper with support of the official opposition moves Canada two steps backwards.

I beg of you that you vote with your conscience and engage your caucus to re-examine their official position. This is not the time to play petty politics.

Yours respectfully,

Beijing York

Cross-posted at Resettle THIS!