‘The Government is opposed to opening this debate’

A statement from the Prime Minister’s Office on Mark Warawa’s motion.

The Government is opposed to opening this debate. Parliament has already voted on this issue. We don’t think it should be opened again.




Browse

‘The Government is opposed to opening this debate’

  1. OMG, what utter crap. Warawa IS part of the government, and they are playing a game where they SAY they don’t support something, but instead call it in through the back door of private members’ bills.

  2. Ronald Reagan ~ I’ve noticed everyone who is for abortion has already been born

    NY Times ~ 160 Million and Counting:

    In 1990, the economist Amartya Sen published an essay in The New York Review of Books with a bombshell title: “More Than 100 Million Women Are Missing.”

    The essay did not mention abortion.

    Twenty years later, the number of “missing” women has risen to more than 160 million, and a journalist named Mara Hvistendahl has given us a much more complete picture of what’s happened. Her book is called “Unnatural Selection: Choosing Boys Over Girls, and the Consequences of a World Full of Men.” As the title suggests, Hvistendahl argues that most of the missing females weren’t victims of neglect. They were selected out of existence, by ultrasound technology and second-trimester abortion.

    • 18,000 children die of starvation every day.

      • And more abortions would help that how? By your genius logic, we could end child poverty by simply aborting every pregnancy. Brilliant!

        • Don’t troll on starving dying children Rick.

  3. Mark Warawa says: “I think parliamentarians are faced with two choices: We either condemn this form of discrimination against women and girls or we endorse it. It’s not something you can ride the fence on.”

    Stephen Harper says: “The Government is opposed to opening this debate. Parliament has already voted on this issue. We don’t think it should be opened again.”

    By Warawa’s own logic then, his leader is endorsing “this form of discrimination against women and girls.” How can Warawa and his pro-life caucus allow that to stand? How long are they going to tolerate their own leadership throwing up roadblocks on this issue?

    (And, no, I don’t subscribe to the notion that Harper’s trying to change abortion laws through the back door. I think he’s scared of the issue because of purely political reasons. What I can’t understand is how the pro-life MPs can continue to sit on the Government side of the house, based on their own heated rhetoric, if their own leadership is scuttling their every move.)

    • They should start a new party more in line with their values.

      • The pro-lifers are handing out medals to pro-life heroes, yet happily sit in a party with a leader that will do nothing to advance their issues. They’re obviously not that picky about the company they keep.

        • They are probably content with the small victories they get with the CPC.
          They are well aware that there is no going back on abortion but they can reconcile themselves by hoping that at least making people aware that there are many who use abortion as a means of getting rid of female fetuses until a male one appears, they may reduce the number of overall abortions.
          They cannot see either the NDP or Liberals allowing a Warawa to propose such a motion.

          • I wonder if the pro-life donors to the party are as satisfied with these, uh, victories.

    • 30 per cent of the cabinet ministers voted in favour of Woodsworth’s motion. Cabinet. Kenney, Ambrose … people with power.

      • To me, that’s not evidence of a hidden agenda. That’s evidence of throwing the pro-lifers a bone.

    • “What I can’t understand is how the pro-life MPs can continue to sit …. ”

      Emerson ~ A man is usually more careful of his money than he is of his principles.

      FinPost Jan 2012:
      While MPs earn a generous salary of $157,000 a year, the total contributions to the parliamentary pension fund amount to $248,668 a year, he said.

      As the ranks of Canadians covered by private-sector pension plans dwindle, the retirement benefits afforded MPs and senators contrast sharply.

      MPs qualify after just six years, minimum retirement age is set at 55, and benefits can reach a maximum of 75% of the best five years’ average pay.

      • Jules Winfield ~ Exactamundo!

    • “And, no, I don’t subscribe to the notion that Harper’s trying to change
      abortion laws through the back door. I think he’s scared of the issue
      because of purely political reasons”

      Totally agree. Harper regards the issue as one of those third rails of politics that you don’t touch. It’s one thing to let backbenchers introduce motions he knows either won’t pass, or are symbolic. It’s quite another to introduce legislation; which so far his majority government has not done. My take of it is that he believes he has bigger fish to fry and doesn’t want to be distracted by this issue.

      • Come now, Jim. Aren’t you going to tell us how the Conservatives are ” put in a difficult spot by not supporting the motion,” how they ” at best, somewhat, but not strongly, disapprove of gender selection,” and how “intelligent” MPs would support the motion?

        • Didn’t say anything about the *Conservatives* being “put in a difficult spot by not supporting the motion”. What I did say should have been quite clear the first time around.

          • Of course you didn’t. You only said those things about the NDP, before you learned that the Government wasn’t supporting the motion.

          • Nowhere here does it say the government is not supporting this motion.

          • There are 3 sentences quoted. Let’s look at them.

            First sentence:
            “The Government is opposed to opening this debate.”

            OK – fine. But what exactly is “this debate”? Is it referring to the gender selection abortion condemnation? Perhaps the 2nd sentence will tell us.

            Second sentence:
            “Parliament has already voted on this issue.”

            Hmmm, parliament has not voted on the gender selection abortion condemnation; so what exactly is “this issue”?

            3rd and final sentence:
            “We don’t think it should be opened again.”

            Well, still have no clue as to what’s being mentioned. But we know that whatever it is, the PMO thinks it should not be opened again. And that’s all we know.

            Only basic reading comprehension skills required to determine the quote is next to meaningless without context.

            Doing a google search shows that the PMO quote actually refers to the wider debate over restricting abortions.

            See http://www.globalnews.ca/health/commons+set+to+face+more+complex+abortion+debate+this+time+over+sex+selection/6442766643/story.html.

            So what exactly is the problem, Lenny? Did you read something into the context-less, and thus meaningless, quote that wasn’t there?

            Like I said, nowhere here does it say the government is not supporting this motion.

          • “Context-less”? Are you for real? The PMO’s statement is entirely regarding Warawa’s motion. What part of that don’t you get?

          • How could the PMO quote be referring to Warara’s motion when it says “Parliament has already voted on this issue” given that Parliament has not voted on Warara’s motion or anything related to gender selection via abortion?

            If the PMO statement is “entirely regarding Warawa’s motion” as you claim, then “this issue” would have to refer to Warara’s motion and a vote on something very similar to Warara’s motion would have had to have already taken place – which is not the case.

            The PMO statement refers to restricting abortion rights, not to Warwara’s motion. Read the linked article for context. Or read a different one. Just try to get some context.

          • The PMO obviously disagrees that Parliament hasn’t voted on restricting abortions, as evidenced by that fact that they were directly responding to Warawa’s motion.

          • Were they? Where in the 3 sentence quote does it refer to Warawa’s motion?

          • Ah, so the media is fabricating the fact that the PMO’s comment was in regards to Warawa’s Motion. That’s probably it.

          • Can you please answer the extremely straightforward question?

          • As I’m unaware of the “context” of your question above, I assume the question is: what colour is the sky?

          • No skin off my apple if you won’t answer an extremely straightforward question.

  4. Well thank goodness for that. I hope Harp sticks to it as the rest of us are sick of hearing about it.

Sign in to comment.