En Garde, or, This Is Our Chance to Bury Anti-Choice

NOTE: Sorry, but Blogger is screwing up. None of the links in this seems to be working. I'll try to fix it again later.

UPDATE: And now the links are working. I didn't do anything. Go figger.


Andrew Scheer, former and worst-ever Speaker of the House, has won the Conservative Party leadership. But as several people have pointed out, Michael Harris among them, Scheer has a BIG debt to pay. To social conservatives, aka, anti-choice, anti-gay, anti-trans, anti-assisted dying, anti-comprehensive sex-ed dinosaurs.

These social conservatives worked their hearts out for Stephen Harper for ten years. In return, they got nothing but strategic tokenism. The passion they invest in their cause never gave Harper so much as a palpitation — but it did lead him to calculate that he could bamboozle them ’til the cows came home and cash in on their political usefulness.

This time, the so-cons were wised up. They sold thousands of memberships on behalf of Trost and Lemieux. That support ultimately went Scheer’s way. Now they will expect him to deliver.

Brent Rathgeber makes a similar point.

And the Straight cites the fetus freak group fronted by Alyssa Golob as taking credit.

While Scheer has taken a page out of Stephen Harper’s book (“We will not reopen the abortion debate”), that’s going to be tough, given how many zygote zealots feel they are OWED.

But in order for him to pay his debts, he’ll have to get into power and I don’t see that happening anytime soon.

Until he gets his kick at the can, I have some suggestions for what pro-choice, pro-civil rights, pro-modern times people should do.

As I said back when the Liberals (*ptui*) got their majority, we have a historic chance in Canada to get this abortion dealie dealt with once and for all.

Canada is staunchly pro-choice (latest Ipsos poll shows 77% support) and there have been some encouraging developments over the last while.

In December, the city of Grande Prairie successfully fought off hateful bus ads with a judge’s decision that came very close to calling the ads “hate speech.” (As they are.)

In April, research done by Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada (ARCC) paid off big time when it was revealed that anti-choice gangs were getting federal Canada Summer Jobs grants. The feds promised that would end.

Continuing that work, ARCC is running a “Letter of the Week” campaign aimed at disclosing provincial grants given to rights-denying organizations like fake clinics.

Earlier this month, we learned that Health Canada has eased some of its idiotic restrictions on the abortion pill.

This year’s March for Lies in Ottawa was the smallest in memory. (RCMP pegged the number at 4,000.) It was so small that fetus freaks didn’t even *try* to claim that it was bigger and better than last year.

One of the side-stories to the March for Lies was the raising of an anti-choice flag at Ottawa City Hall. It was hastily taken down, but there was fall-out from it.

Notably, increased attention to the clinic harassers at the Morgentaler Clinic in downtown Ottawa. A result of that is today’s announcement that Ontario’s Attorney General, Yasir Naqvi, intends to craft a “bubble zone” law to protect clinics.

Also today we learned that a judge in New Brunswick has granted another injunction against clinic harassers.

These are all hopeful developments. Our job over the next couple of years is to continue and expand these efforts.

• Keep an eye on the federal government to make sure no more public money goes to anti-choice groups.

• Pressure provincial governments to spend money on women and children more wisely than on fake clinics.

• Support cities and towns targetted for hate-speech ads.

• Encourage healthcare providers to continue to press for more reasonable regulations on the abortion pill.

• Support bubble zones in Ontario and other provinces that do not have such protection.

I believe that anti-choice is dying in Canada — I mean, just 4,000 people arsed themselves to come out for March for Lies??!!? — and the election of Andrew Scheer is its last gasp.

We have the opportunity to move our laws, institutions, and media to the point where if and when Scheer’s owners try any funny stuff around abortion, Canadians will just point and laugh.

Because we are sooo beyond that here in modern, pro-choice Canada.

A Coup for Parliament or a Recruiting Tool for CHP

As we know, Warwara's Wank ended with a further wank, this one about Free Speech.

The long-awaited Speaker's decision on his point of privilege over having his member's statement (S.O.30) snuffed by the CON Whip was announced yesterday at around 3 p.m.

Here's Kady O'Malley's story filed at 4:57 p.m.

If backbench MPs want to the right to speak freely in the House, they're going to have to start standing up to be counted -- even if it means ignoring the speaking lists prepared by the party whip to compete against their caucus colleagues for the attention of the speaker. 

That, it seems, is the gist of House of Commons Speaker Andrew Scheer's much-anticipated ruling on the point of privilege raised by Conservative MP Mark Warawa after his pre-Question Period speaking slot was abruptly yanked by his party's whip due to his choice of subject -- specifically, his similarly scuttled attempt to bring a non-binding motion to condemn sex-selective abortion before the House.

Although he ultimately found that no prima facie breach of privilege had occurred, Scheer made it clear that, as far as he and his predecessors are concerned, the speaker has never ceded the right to choose which member should be recognized -- not just during the fifteen minute block designated for members' statements, but, in theory, during QP as well. He just hasn't yet been put in a position where he would have to do so, as -- again, at least as yet --  no members have ever attempted to circumvent the whip-created list.

So, fans of the Westminster parliamentary system parsed that all to hell, gleefully anticipating little bobble-heads bobbing up and down trying to catch the eye of the venerable 33-year-old Speaker.

The more cynical of course wondered just how much eye-catching Opposition members might have to mount. Clown-costumes wouldn't be out of place, after all.

Other cynics wondered if this really meant anything at all.

Funny, though, not much attention at all was paid to this story filed by John Ivison at 11:13 yesterday morning, about 4 hours before the decision.

John Ivison: Ruling on alleged breach of Warawa’s privilege to speak freely could head off Tory rebellion

But there are rumblings in caucus that Mr. Scheer may make a significant additional ruling by pointing to the Westminster example, where it is a long established convention that the Speaker has the right to recognize members from either side of the House when they stand during Question Time. In the British House of Commons, a number of MPs bob up and down at any given time, trying to catch the Speaker’s eye, and it is up to the chair to recognize them. The inference would be that if more than one MP stands up during members’ statements and Question Period, they could be recognized by the Speaker, whether they are on the whips’ list or not.

If Mr. Scheer leans towards the Westminster model, it could have profound implications in both the short and long term governance of the House. It would also suggest he will not find Mr. Warawa’s privilege was breached, since he could have been recognized by the speaker if he’d only stood up to speak at members’ statements.

In the short-term, it could head off a rebellion in the Conservative caucus that threatens to culminate in some Tories voting alongside the Liberals. New Liberal leader Justin Trudeau has introduced a motion to allocate members’ statements in alphabetical order which will reach the House on Wednesday and, absent some kind of significant reform, a number of Tory MPs may be tempted to signal their displeasure.

So, at least four hours in advance, senator-in-waiting Ivison was tipped to the outcome.

And indeed, the Speaker's ruling does have the salubrious effect of quelling the now pretty-well defunct Backbenchers Spring.

As the Church Lady would say: How conveeeenient.

Political shenangigans in the Speaker's Office!?!1???

Say it ain't so.

Now of course the question is which of the intrepid backbenchers will get up on their hind legs and attempt to speak to an unapproved topic -- like abortion, for example?

@fernhilldammit It's actually pretty close in structure to the UK model. We'll see if he actually sticks to it.

— E (@freezingkiwi) April 23, 2013

(I've bet @freezingkiwi that his kiwis will really freeze before that happens.)

Will only the nutbars avail themselves of this privilege ignominious display? Will more sensible, team-playing BBers keep shtum and/or clap their flippers as they read the usual 'job-killing carbon tax' talking points ad nauseum?

I wondered if Speaker Scheer had offered any protection -- kinda like whistle-blower protection -- for retribution from vengeful whips and leaders.

According to Mark Jarvis, author of Democratizing the Constitution:

@fernhilldammit @thomashall17 nothing.

— mark d. jarvis (@markdjarvis) April 24, 2013

Retired House of Commons procedural clerk, Thomas Hall, went further.

@fernhilldammit @markdjarvis Yep!The pwr to sign nomination papers needs to be removed from party leaders and returned to riding assocs.

— Thomas Hall (@ThomasHall17) April 24, 2013

It's down to party constitutions. And ipso fatso, only future Christian Heritage Party candidates will partake.

ADDED: For all of you breathless with anticipation as to what Free Speech Warrior and Defender of Girls, Mark Warawa, would say in his totally unfettered S.O. 31 today -- behold! (I swear you can't make this shit up.)

UPDATE (April 26/13): How successful was Speaker Scheer in quelling the Backbench Revolt? Perfectly. Not one BBer voted for the Liberal motion to choose MPs to make member's statements by alphabetical order.

ShriEEEk! Radical foreign lobby funds Canadian group

Oh.  Wait. 

This radical foreign "special interest" lobby?

The Catholic Organization for Life and Family [...] was cofounded by the Conference of Bishops and the world’s largest fraternal Catholic organization, the U.S.-based Knights of Columbus, “to build a culture of life and a civilization of love by promoting respect for human life and dignity and the essential role of the family.”  [...]
Although COLF is autonomous and they do their own publication, they still rely on outside sources to survive and are co-funded largely by the Conference of Bishops and the Knights of Columbus  [...] Based out of Connecticut, the Knights of Columbus run a network of charitable organizations which fund everything from broadcast media and construction of churches to scholarships and political activism. As of February 2011, the Canadian Knights have 227,538 members comprising 1,942 councils which form a dominant part of a link connecting potent Members of Parliament, the pro-life movement and the Catholic church.
Woodworth is a Knight, as are Americans John Boehner, Jeb Bush, and Rick Santorum.  [...]  The Canadian March of Life received $6,250 from the Knights of Columbus in 2004. In 2005, the Ottawa march disappeared from the books, but the Campaign for Life Coalition became an item on the cash recipient list with $17,752 in total financial support from 2005 to 2007.
Furthermore, according to a public statement by the Canadian Knights of Columbus, the annual interest of their $1 million Bishop du Laval fund is given directly to the Conference of Bishops. The statement also notes that the “Canadian Knights have also been key supporters and participants in Canada’s annual March of Life.” [...]
A March news release by the American Knights of Columbus records a private luncheon attended by Supreme Director of the Canadian Knights, Robert Cayea, and Speaker of the House, Conservative MP Andrew Scheer. The Speaker is himself a member of the Knights of Columbus Council 10418 in Regina. Other notable members of the Knights include Conservative MP Jason Kenney, Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, and a potential successor to PM Stephen Harper.

From here.



Its representatives (that we know) in the House of Commons: MP Stephen Woodworth, Minister Jason Kenney and Speaker Andrew Scheer.

Where's *Ethical Oil* Kathryn Marshall to shrieeek about a radical "foreign special interest" lobby and the art of political puppetry when her incomparable performance art is required?

This will have to do, then. 

Grand merci to Teri Mooring.

Cons for the pre-born. After? Not so much.

A member of the NDP says the Speaker of the House of Commons, Andrew Scheer, demanded that her 3 month old infant be removed from the House before a vote in connection with the bill on the abolition of the gun registry, yesterday. The office of the Speaker refuses to confirm or deny these allegations.

The MP for Verchères-Les Patriotes, Sana Hassaina gave birth to a boy that she named Iskander-Jack, in memory of the former NDP leader. She had recently returned to work and since she is breastfeeding, her husband who is on paternity leave accompanies her to Parliament. She was warned the vote would take place and finished nursing her baby. She searched the crowded lobby for her husband but not finding him, entered the House with her infant.

Once inside, she was told by a page that the Speaker wanted the baby to leave.

News item, in Google translate.

Original version here.

The CONtempt Party that's providing one of its MPs an opportunity to explore the legal status of the unborn - and reopen the abortion debate - won't let a tiny infant stay briefly in the House while his mother votes.

"Family values" - unless it's inCONvenient.

Grand merci to lagatta who provided the original news item.

UPDATE: @vickyatclc links to this - labour standards & women breastfeeding in the workplace.

CBC coverage of incident and Speaker's denial.

Youngest-Ever Dinosaur Elected Speaker

Meet the youngest-ever Speaker of the House, Andrew Scheer. Who is also a rabid fetus fetishist and homophobe.

He says he was excited to join the new [Reform] party, but even more excited to raise important issues. At the time, the same-sex “marriage” issue was headline news. He was also concerned about high taxes and their impact on family life. “I noticed the trend of people putting off marriage and child-bearing because they couldn’t afford it,” he said, explaining that many economic issues are social issues, too – and vice versa.

He is also unabashedly pro-life and has been rated “pro-life” by Campaign Life Coalition all three times he has run. In 2008, after the governor-general gave the Order of Canada to abortionist Henry Morgentaler, Scheer spoke out. He said, “I am greatly disappointed that Canada’s highest civilian honour has been politicized and debased by this appointment.”

When he ran in June 2004, he said the same-sex “marriage” issue was “front and centre” and that he unapologetically defended traditional marriage. He said the issue helped him, considering that both his Liberal and NDP opponents supported SSM and many constituents were either opposed or uncomfortable with changing the definition of marriage.

When the marriage debate took place the following year, Scheer said C-38, which redefined marriage to include homosexual couples, “is abhorrent to me … and to every member of every faith community” and he explained why he was voting against the bill.

As @danspeerin tweeted:

Our new #spkr41 is super pro-life and anti gay marriage - That's right the youngest speaker ever, somehow has the views of our grandparents

Good thing this little twerp won't be voting.