It is just coming up to 1 a.m. in Ottawa as I write this and, out in St. John's, NF where the Conservative leader's campaign tour finds itself bedding down for the night, Dimitri Soudas, Stephen Harper's chief spokesman, has just finished a rush midnight briefing with the reporters on that tour.
Soudas called the briefing to respond to stories that appeared in The Toronto Star and Le Devoir who were given a tape recording of Saskatoon MP Brad Trost — who proudly boasts that there is no one to the right of him in the Conservative caucus — in which Trost bragged that his government had cut funding to Planned Parenthood – but couldn't yet announce that cut. When asked about the cut earlier this evening, party spokesman gave no answer. (See the story). Soudas, late in the evening, is telling reporters that no decision has been made.
It was an exquisitely timed leak — likely from Liberal sources — to the Star and Le Devoir as, with a little over a week to go, it puts abortion into the middle of the election campaign and gives Harper's opponents the chance to yell “A-ha! So-Con Hidden Agenda!”. This tactic, unfair as it might have been, turned many female voters away from the Tories in 2006 and almost cost them that election. Now, with the Liberal campaign unable to find much traction, the old bogeyman that Harper will gut abortion access in Canada is about to be trotted out.
I say it was unfair to have done this in 2006 and 2008 for two reasons: The Conservative Party, at its first policy convention, took a grassroots decision — with a lot of yelling and screaming — that it would not touch abortion laws in Canada. Harper has said in those two earlier campaigns and has said again in this campaign that he would not take action on abortion. In five years leading a minority government he has walked the walked (for better or worse, depending on your point of view) and even voted against a private members bill from an MP in his own caucus that would have nudged the dial slightly towards the anti-abortion folks.
But in this campaign, Harper is actively and openly seeking a majority government. And with Trost now saying Planned Parenthood is not getting any funding but we can't tell you about it … well, it gives the Conservatives' opponents an easy swing at the plate: If Harper does this with a minority, what changes won't he even tell you about with a majority?
So the Conservatives — or rather Soudas in his midnight briefing — now have to stuff the toothpaste back in the tube because of the Trost remarks, in much the same way they tried to do so (unsuccesfully) in 2004 when Conservative MP Cheryl Gallant compared abortion to the beheading of an Iraq war hostage.
And yet: Too many politicians won't stand up for their own convictions on this issue — it's an issue that does not follow partisan lines no matter what any Tory-hater tells you — but will be quick to criticize any of their opponents who do. (Watch what happens to Trost Thursday). In the 2006 campaign, I thought it tremendously hypocritical of Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin to try, at the end of the campaign he would lose, to use the abortion bogeyman to attack the Conservatives from a stage filled with several of the Toronto-area Liberal MPs who actually took fundraising dollars from anti-abortion groups. Believe me: You will find a healthy percentage of Liberal MPs who are not comfortable with abortion laws.
Of course, there are many in the Liberal caucus that believe that the right to abortion access ought to be strengthened in law. (Legal beagles will te
Meanwhile, there are many small-c conservatives in the country who wonder why it was they elected a Big-C Conservative government if not for taking action on restricting or limiting abortion. They are as frustrated as the small-l liberals who want a government that will lock-in abortion access rights.
But, as any professional politician will tell you: The issue is simply not a vote winner. It's a polarizing issue where consensus is difficult if not impossible. Kudos to Brad Trost for standing up in front of his constituents and laying it on the line. I would say the same thing to any politician who stood up to campaign as hard for the opposite view — for the simple reason that we ought to be able to find politicians who will not frankly discuss their views on these difficult, troublesome but tremendously important topics.
Why are you saying it's “unfair tactics”. What Trost said is news, it's not assumptions. And the fact that the CPC won't deny it is even more newsworthy. Frankly, you seem to be pissed at the fact that you didn't get the scoop more than anything else…
Even if Trost is against a woman's right to choose, at least he supports gay rights: http://www.bradtrost.com/
The fact is that the Conservatives, with particular attention to the Reform wing have a great many anti-abortion activists in their ranks, and should they secure a majority government their oft mouthed promise to leave the abortion issue, (and death penalty, and anything to do with homosexuality) alone becomes less credible. It isn't as if any of the Party's seeking a mandate are above fibbing, or 'overpromising' in order to secure a mandate. Have you not read the Harper Team? Flannagan specifically acknowledged advancing half truths and outright lies on behalf of the CPC, with the criteria for use of being credibility, not truth.
You claim that it is unfair for this comment, on the record, to be used against the Conservatives. You hint that because it was leaked by a 'Liberal Source' it is somehow less true? Even though nobody denies that the statement originated with a Conservative MP? Well, if the Conservatives are campaigning in one corner of the country on the promise to oppose planned parenthood because they advocate abortions, whilst at the same moment the Conservative Party is denying any such intent exists, then it is YOUR job to point this out, NOT to demand that this be swept under the rug.
The time when MPs could speak freely has never existed, let alone stray from party talking points.
The trained seals just bring in a constituency, money, and *bam*, government cheques for life.
Thus is Canadian democracy.
“Kudos to Brad Trost for standing up in front of his constituents and laying it on the line.”
Uhh… Trost didn't stand up in front of his constituents.
Trost told a closed-door meeting about his subversive attempts to de-normalise abortion, and his position had to be leaked to his constituents.
So Akin has joined the anti-Conservative group at the Parliamentary Press Gallery. Why don't you ask Ignatieff about his closeness to the Bush Administration, and how he was actually part of the Iraq invasion.
Cat got your tongue, along with the rest of the MSM?
What some people call “normal” in Canada is, I believe, unique among developed countries: In Canada, there is absolutely no law limiting abortion, so that an infant can be killed as long as there is still one foot in the mother's womb. And we are told it's extreme to even question this situation! Yes, a pro-life motion was voted down at the first Conservative policy convention. Social conservatives there hoped they had made at least one gain there, with a resolution in favour of restoring traditional marriage, but Harper seems to have made no real attempt to carry through on that one.
It is quite disingenuous to consider it an”exquisitely timed leak — likely from Liberal sources”
This wasn't a leak, some secret document illicitly obtained and passed on under the darkness of night – this was a Conservative MP raising this issue in a political setting with a group of advocates, very much an on-the-record discussion. The fact that he was stupid enough to think that his remarks would remain in that room speaks to his lack of political sophistication, not some nefarious Liberal/press cabal determined to make abortion the issue.
Beyond raising the abortion question, it is doubly embarrassing to the Conservatives because the portfolio in question is the same one where Bev Oda/ Jason Kenney/ Prime Minister Harper have already been shown to be politicizing funding decisions. Kairos, Match International, Canadian Council on International Co-operation, Alternatives, Rights and Democracy… if Trost comments about Planned Parenthood are accurate, it will only be the latest in a long string of politically-based decision-making about international aid.
right or left this issue drives people to violence in the us and causes near the same here in canada. it is not unfair for people to listen the conservative member from saskatchewan bragging that he is quietly(sneaking) behind the scenes getting his party to restrict womens rights.
this is what the alliance and the reform always stood for.
so no it is not unfair to call a spade a spade, the conservatives with a majority will restrict womens rights on both sides of the abortion debate.
It's not about “rights”. It's about funding multiple advocacy groups.
Abortion, like other health related issues is a provincial domain. It's stupid for a federal politician to discuss it at all.
A polarizing issue, but has nothing to do with CPC/Lib/NDP and more to do with a person's personal belief. As David says, there are probably as many pro-life Liberals as there are pro-abortion CPC members.
It isn't a woman's issue either, you have to admit that a father to be should have some say in an unborn life, don't you? What you seem to be advocating is just another form of birth control, and perhaps some people see it that simply. It is the free and completely unfettered access that annoys some people, third trimester abortions, etc.
And one other issue, if funding is pulled for this special interest group will they have to close shop and move away? Nothing is stopping people from donating to Planned Parenthood… I don't see why people think that the government has to fund every special group that lives and breaths… cut them all off!
You can't hide something in a bill either it is there or it is not. Abortion opponents want to dictate what privates companies can or can not do if they join the insurance exchange. There is no “abortion agenda”. It's a legal medical procedure, get over it!