Abortion: Shut up or keep the debate alive?

May 5, 2010, By Anca Gurzu

‘We’ve got five weeks or whatever left until the G8 starts. Shut the f–k up on this issue,” Conservative Senator Nancy Ruth told a number of women’s rights groups on Monday. “If you push it, there’ll be more backlash. This is now a political football. This is not about women’s health in this country.”

When Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced that Canada would champion maternal and child health at the G8 summit, foreign aid groups felt their efforts had paid off. They had long been asking the government to put the issue on the top of its agenda, and now the government had acted. But for the last few weeks, one debate has been dominating both political circles and the media: abortion funding. The abortion debate has now quickly sparked another debate within itself: one of pragmatism versus principle. And the battle lines are anything but clear as NGO goes against NGO and opposition party vies with opposition party.

Those in favour of pragmatism fear that the abortion debate is not only taking attention away from what is a hugely important issue in the developing world, but will scuttle the government’s appetite for the initiative. This is what Ms. Ruth, who was quoted by the Toronto Star, was trying to say on Monday: Be happy the government has identified the issue as a priority or risk repercussions with constant criticisms. “Let’s stop politicizing this and let’s get on with the work that needs to be done to measure the progress of lives saved,” said Chris Dendys, executive director of Results Canada. Results is one of seven NGOs that comprise the Canadian Coalition for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health. These organizations were largely responsible for the initiative in the first place, and have been working with the government to push it along. “To me it feels like our sister’s house is on fire and we are debating the volume of water it takes to put out the flames,” she said, referring to the millions of mothers and children who die in poor countries every year because they do not have access to proper health care.

(more…)

   Send article as PDF to

Share this....

Hide Sites

May 4th, 2010

How to Save Nearly 10 million Lives
G8 Nations Should Each Champion One of the Key Inputs in Primary Care

OTTAWA – “Time is running out for the world’s most powerful nations to articulate a plan of action that will reduce the horrific loss of more than 340,000 women and the nine million children who die every year from entirely preventable or treatable causes,” said Dr. Keith Martin, Member of Parliament for Esquimalt – Juan de Fuca.

Dr. Martin is in Vancouver today attending the world’s largest meeting of pediatric academic researchers as part of the Pediatric Academic Societies’ Annual Meeting.

Although it is deeply regrettable that Canada’s International Cooperation Minister Bev Oda confirmed at the G8 meeting in Halifax last week that the Canadian government would not fund access to abortion as part of its plan to reduce maternal mortality, there is still a way forward to implement a plan that will save lives.

“In order to get the job done, each G8 nation should take a leadership role in one of the key inputs needed to provide primary care in developing countries. For example, the Americans could be the lead country in training health care workers, Canada could take the lead on access to clean water and sanitation or food security and micronutrients, and the French could champion people’s access to a full array of family planning options, including access to safe abortions in countries where it is legal. In this way G8 nations could coordinate their efforts with each other, with recipient nations, NGOs, foundations, and large multi-lateral organizations,” said Dr. Martin.

(more…)

   Send article as PDF to

Share this....

Hide Sites

We don’t go in for that sort of thing
Elizabeth Payne, The Ottawa Citizen
April 29th, 2010

The federal government’s “No sex please, we’re Canadians” approach to foreign aid is not limited to maternal health, it seems.

A new Children and Youth Strategy for CIDA (the Canadian International Development Agency) is also drawing criticism for its failure to address the sexual health of young women in the developing world, despite the fact that sexual abuse, sexual exploitation and the dangers of pregnancy loom large in their lives. As with maternal health, those who work in the field say improving the health and well-being of young women and girls must include reproductive health care.

In both cases, it is foreign aid tailored to be inoffensive to the Conservative party’s core voters. It is part of a pattern that seems designed to make sure that no one gets the wrong idea about Canadians. From removal of references to gay rights in the new citizenship guide, to the removal of the International Planned Parenthood Federation from the list of foreign aid agencies Canada supports, the message is clear. In the Great White North we don’t go in for that sort of thing. No hanky panky here. And don’t expect sex to factor into our foreign aid dollars (such as they are) either.

Except that, of course, sex does happen here. Canadians can easily get access to birth control or abortions if they need to. And yet when it comes to foreign aid, the Canadian message is both hardline and hypocritical.

It may play well to certain voters back home, but help for pregnant teenagers in Guatemala and sick mothers in Indonesia should not depend on the perceived whims of Canadian voters. Playing domestic politics with foreign aid is wrong — especially at a time when Canada’s already meagre foreign aid budgets are being cut.

(more…)

   Send article as PDF to

Share this....

Hide Sites

Feds spike abortion funding
Won’t be included in family planning for developing countries

LAURA PAYTON, PARLIAMENTARY BUREAU
April 27, 2010

Canada could pay for family planning in developing countries, but that doesn’t include abortion, International Co-operation Minister Bev Oda said Monday.

Family planning and abortion were bound to resurge in the news as Oda convenes a meeting of G8 development ministers this week in advance of the leaders’ meeting in June.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced in January that Canada — this year’s G8 host and chairman — wanted to make maternal and child health a priority. It soon led to questions about whether that would include family planning funding for women in developing countries.

Harper finally said he didn’t want to reopen the abortion debate and blamed the opposition parties for stirring the pot.

Oda said the internationally accepted definition of family planning, used by the World Health Organization, UN and G8, includes contraception but not abortion.

(more…)

   Send article as PDF to

Share this....

Hide Sites

‘No division’ between member nations despite conflicting approach to funding of maternal health

Joanna Smith in Halifax Susan Delacourt in Ottawa
April 27, 2010

The Conservative government has stated Canada will not spend any humanitarian dollars on abortion as part of its signature G8 initiative to improve maternal and child health in developing countries.

“Canada’s contribution will not include funding of abortions,” Canadian International Co-operation Minister Bev Oda told reporters Monday after arriving in Halifax for a meeting of G8 development ministers.

The declaration – coupled with a similar statement from her parliamentary secretary, Conservative MP Jim Abbott, in the Commons about an hour earlier – came as a surprise after months of vague back and forth without a categorical stand on whether its new foreign-aid focus on maternal health included access to safe abortions.

“Canada’s contribution to maternal and child health may involve various interventions, including family planning, which includes the use of contraceptive methods,” Oda said.

The announcement puts Canada at odds with the United States and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton – who spoke out for financing abortion when she was in Canada last month – as well as several of Canada’s G8 partners.

(more…)

   Send article as PDF to

Share this....

Hide Sites

April 26, 2010
Joanna Smith

HALIFAX—The upcoming meeting of G8 development ministers is unlikely to top the scolding U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave the Conservative government for trying to keep abortions out of its maternal health project as far as headlines go.

That is probably just as well, because the main players will have enough to do trying to convince the rest of the world — including the protesters expected to sound their disappointment on the streets of Halifax — they are still serious about keeping promises made years ago.

“We’re hoping the development ministers will acknowledge that their governments have fallen short and if not announce things at least push their leaders to announce new assistance when they meet (at the G8 leaders’ summit) in June,” said Mark Fried, advocacy coordinator for Oxfam Canada.

The three-day ministerial meeting that begins Monday evening is supposed to lay the groundwork for proposals that will be the focus of the main G8 event in Huntsville, Ont. and Bev Oda, the Canadian minister for international cooperation, appears confident she will be able to find enough agreement among her counterparts to get that job done.

(more…)

   Send article as PDF to

Share this....

Hide Sites

Oda to push for G8 strategy during Halifax meetings
Heather Scoffield, The Canadian Press

OTTAWA – Defining a maternal and child health strategy for developing countries is the least of the G8′s challenges on the aid front right now.

At a key meeting of G8 development ministers in Halifax this week, Canada’s Bev Oda is confident she’ll find enough common ground to announce progress on Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s signature G8 agenda item.

“Development ministers are going to agree on a way forward,” said Oda’s spokeswoman Jessica Fletcher.

Oda is also expected to add some clarity to Canada’s own approach to improving the lives of mothers and their young children in poor countries, amidst criticism Ottawa is trying to sidestep inclusion of abortion and family planning. More problematic, however, is Canada’s goal to make sure countries are living up to their substantial – and expensive – promises of the past.

The meeting, to prepare for the June summit in Huntsville, Ont., comes at a time when government funding is in short supply around the world, and the very case for any international aid at all is being called into question by a growing pile of publications and high-profile critics.

(more…)

   Send article as PDF to

Share this....

Hide Sites

The very reasonable Mr. Martin
Reproductive rights proposal is common sense

John Ivison, National Post
April 7, 2010

Much as Hamlet was suspected of madness and sent to England to recover his wits, “or if not ’tis no great matter there,” so those who have taken leave of their senses in our time seem to end up in the House of Commons. How else can you explain the Liberal motion calling for the government to include abortion in its maternal health plan, when a significant number of its own MPs oppose the procedure?

In such confused times, Liberal MP Keith Martin has a history of acting as the voice of reason –
bailing out his own party and providing political cover for an obdurate Prime Minister to reach a
compromise.

Read the full article here…National Post – The very reasonable Mr. Martin – Ivison – 7Apr10

   Send article as PDF to

Share this....

Hide Sites

Monday, April 5, 2010 8:19 AM

A maternal-health answer and more Helena Guergis questions

Jane Taber

1. Avoiding the abortion debate. Keith Martin, a Liberal MP and medical doctor, may just have found an “out” for Stephen Harper and his maternal health initiative for this summer’s G8 – let another country focus on providing safe abortions.

First some background: The Prime Minister’s signature initiative for the summit appears to be in jeopardy after Hillary Clinton’s assertion last week that any such project must include access to abortion. British Foreign Secretary David Miliband later added his voice to that of the U.S. Secretary of State.

The Harper government has vowed that it will not reopen the abortion debate through this initiative. But with the criticisms of the British and the Americans, the initiative is in grave jeopardy if not dead already.
There may be a way to salvage it, however.

In a recent article in The Mark, Dr. Martin finds a way for Mr. Harper to “square” his opposition to abortion “while implementing an effective plan to reduce maternal and childhood mortality.”

Dr. Martin, who has worked in Africa and on this issue for previous G8 summits, says the Prime Minister should propose that each member country concentrate on one aspect of the initiative. For example, he writes, that Canada “could be the lead nation on training healthcare workers and micronutrients, another country could focus on providing medications, another on access to family planning and safe abortions etc.”

“In this way a, a comprehensive plan that focuses on enabling the world’s poorest to access basic primary care services can be implemented, with the G8 countries dividing responsibilities and target resources.”

Interesting advice the Tories might want to consider given that Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon said on CTV’s Question Period yesterday that the government – regardless of the U.S. and British positions – is pushing ahead with the initiative. What he didn’t say was how the government would find a solution amid the entrenched positions from key allies.

A meeting of G8 development ministers later this month in Halifax, led by Canada’s Bev Oda, will consider the initiative in advance of this summer’s summit.

Take the Martin article with you – or take Dr. Martin.

view the pdf version here:Globe and Mail – A Maternal Health Answer – Taber – 5Apr10

   Send article as PDF to

Share this....

Hide Sites

Improving Maternal and Child Health in Canada: A look at the FMEC report

By Irving Gold, Vice President, Government Relations and External Affairs

I recently attended a meeting on Parliament Hill organized by Keith Martin (Liberal MP for Esquimalt–Juan de Fuca), Maureen McTeer, and sponsors from all four political parties represented in the House of Commons. The meeting was on the topic of maternal and child health, and was suitably held on the 99-year anniversary
of International Women’s Day.

Read More…

Gravitas_March_Mars_2010

   Send article as PDF to

Share this....

Hide Sites