Dear Canada, Pierre Poilievre is Coming for Your Reproductive Rights

A letter to my fellow Canadians

NurPhoto / Getty Images

To all of my readers. If Canadian politics doesn’t interest you, please just skip this article. But to the extent that you are all citizens of the world, I think many of you may be interested as you are probably hoping that Canada doesn’t also fall victim to yet another freely elected fascist dictator. Monday is a critical day for Canada to fight back a world-wide trend towards forced birth, anti-women, anti-science, anti-equal rights, etc. agendas. So I encourage you all to read on and understand why this election matters and to share this post widely. If this isn’t your cup of Crown Royal (produced in Gimli, Manitoba), I understand, and stay tuned for upcoming content on the apparent refunding of the WHI, weighted vests, and some recent studies that I found interesting.

Dear Fellow Canadians,

On Monday, you will be heading to the ballot box (many of you have already voted, which is terrific). There are many issues at stake, but I want to talk about the one issue that rules them all: abortion.

Why does abortion rule them all? It is the canary in the coal mine. When a government thinks it can criminalize abortion, it’s a way to “other” half the population, and othering is an important part of fascism. Once one human right can be taken away, others quickly follow. Abortion is often the easiest entry point, because it comes with the misogynistic implication that women who want an abortion are lazy or thoughtless or “loose” or had “it” coming (“it’ can be so many awful things here; if you are a woman you know).

Once you concede even a little with abortion, you have conceded it all; it’s just a matter of time. I have watched this unfold over the past 30 years in the U.S., so please, don’t let me be the Canadian abortion Cassandra.

Many Canadians may not think much about abortion, because in 1988 the abortion law was struck down (at the time, abortion was only legal with approval from a committee of doctors and this was often humiliating and inconsistently applied, with many women denied), based on the fact that abortion legislation interfered with “right to life, liberty, and security of the person” as set out in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. There is now no Canadian abortion law per se, meaning one passed by a government allowing it or defining conditions, rather it considered a right protected by Section 7 of the Charter, and this has withstood several legal challenges. Legally, is seems to be just treated as medical care, like an appendectomy and this is as it should be. Although there are access issues and the system isn’t perfect, dedicated individuals are working to continually improve the situation. For those who are wondering, the abortion rate is about the same in Canada or slightly less than the United States (although clandestine abortions in America are not captured by this data), proving that all laws accomplish is make abortion punitive.

What many people don’t know is that there have been multiple efforts by the Conservative Party to undermine choice and introduce forced birth legislation ever since the law was overturned. You need to know this history, because it’s important to believe politicians when they show you who they really are with the bills they introduce and their votes.

Shortly after the abortion law was struck down in 1988, the Conservative Government introduced Bill C-43, which would have banned all abortions (with a health/life of the mother exemption), with a risk of two years in jail for violating the law. The bill passed in the House of Commons by a margin of nine votes in 1990, and although it had not yet become law, as it had not been passed by the Senate or approved by the Governor General, many people erroneously believed it had and for good reason. Since 1941, every bill that had previously passed the House of Commons had also been passed by the Senate. Some doctors stopped offering abortion care and the bill was given so much press coverage that many presumed its passage. Subsequently, in June 1990, one teenager was injured during a home abortion and 20-year-old Yvonne Jurewicz died from a coat hanger abortion. In my mind, the Mulroney government is responsible for that woman’s death. Surprisingly, the vote in the Senate in January 1991 was tied, which meant the bill failed to become law. Really, one vote shy.

Having watched the decimation of abortion rights in the United States, it’s clear the Conservative Government made a fatal error by going all in on abortion in 1990. In the United States, it has been a long path to criminalizing the procedure, chipping away at State and Federal legislation to slowly erode access, boiling us by degrees. The forced-birthers here knew they needed to raise the temperature slowly to get people to accept that some abortion restrictions were needed, maybe even sensible. And once you have conceded that point, it’s only a matter of persistence and money. And they have persistence and money to spare.

The Conservative Party has not since repeated the mistakes of the Mulroney Government and gone for the big brass ring. Instead, they have tried to take the American approach and introduce bills designed to get a forced birth toehold.

So far they have failed. So far.

The Conservative Party Policy Declaration is Forced Birth

While Principle 86 states, “A Conservative Government will not support any legislation to regulate abortion,” this is hypocritical as the platform condemns sex selective abortion as violence against girls, which is a forced birth talking point. Principle 130 asks for “legislation to ensure that individuals who commit violence against a pregnant woman would face additional charges if her unborn child were killed or injured during the commission of a crime against the mother,” another forced birth talking point. Both of these forced-birth talking points are designed to quietly give a fetus the same rights as a person. And once the fetus has even the smallest rights, the strategy is to refer back to that right as proof that fetuses are the same as a person.

Then there is Principle 85:

In recognition of the ethical and scientific concerns around research using human embryos, we support an initial three-year prohibition on embryonic research, and call on the federal government to encourage its granting agencies to focus on more promising adult (post-natal) stem cell research.

Only a political party that believes life begins at conception would want to prohibit embryonic research. And finally, Principle 89, “Abortion should be explicitly excluded from Canada’s maternal and child health program in countries where Canadian aid is delivered, since it is extremely divisive – and often illegal.” This is supporting an agenda to regulate abortion. Also, no one who is pro-choice calls abortion divisive.

How Have Poilievre and His MPs Voted?

The Conservative MPs are supposedly allowed a free vote on abortion, meaning they do not have to follow the Prime Minister’s wishes or the party’s platform. But the reality is that as a party, they are consistently forced-birth.

Let’s look the last four forced-birth bills introduced into the House of Commons that went to a vote:

1. C-311 (Violence Against Pregnant Women Act – 2023): Pierre Poilievre voted in favor, as did the rest of the MPs, unanimously. This was almost certainly a whipped vote, which means every MP was required to vote for the bill. So much for a free vote!

2. C-233 (Sex Selective Abortion – 2021): Pierre Poilievre voted against this, but 81 of his 119 Conservative MPs voted for it.

3. C-225 (Protection of Pregnant Women and Their Preborn Children Act- 2016): Pierre Poilievre voted in favor of this, as did 75 other Conservative MPs, three votes against. Every non-Conservative voted against it.

4. C-510 (An Act to Prevent Coercion of Pregnant Women to Abort - 2010): Pierre Poilievre voted in favor of this (87 out of 136 Conservative MPs voted in favor). For the Liberals, 10 of 65 voted in favor; this was Pre-Justin Trudeau’s requirement for a pro-choice vote. The Bloc, NDP, and Independent all voted against.

There have also been at least two forced birth motions introduced by the Conservatives in this time frame, but they never came to a vote in the House.

Also, no pro-choice politician would be talking about women’s “biological clock”as Poilivere has. They also would not vote against making contraception free. Twice. But Poilievre has.

Remember, you should believe politicians when they show you who they are with their actions and their votes

A Conservative Majority Will Be Dystopian for Abortion Rights

Let’s look at the most recent bill that was introduced, C-311, so you can see what the Conservative Party and every other Political Party in Canada is telling you about choice:

Imagine if the Conservative Party gets a majority next week? You can bet that if that awful Cathy Wagantall from Saskatchewan is re-elected (she introduced the last three forced birth bills) she will be frothing at the mouth to fire up another one. And based on the last vote, if the Conservatives have even a one-vote majority, the next forced birth bill could become law.

Remember, not everyone sees these bills for what they are, a wolf in sheep’s clothing. For example, killing a pregnant woman is extra bad, right? Except, a woman’s life is not worth less if she isn’t pregnant and this kind of language is just a Trojan horse to establish fetal rights with the goal of expanding those rights later (see United States of America). If the Senate doesn’t see this duplicity and a Violence Against Pregnant Women bill were to become law, personhood would be introduced into legislation. This is how the clock would start ticking on abortion.

It’s possible such a law could be challenged and go to the Supreme Court, and we would have to hope they would see it for what it was, an assault on the rights of those who can get pregnant.

Hope is not a strategy, voting is.

And There is One Even More Frightening Thing

Poilievre has been vocal about using the notwithstanding clause to override the Charter. This is VERY CONCERNING.

The notwithstanding clause is essentially a legislative nuclear option that enables the federal or provincial government to override specific sections of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms for a period of five years. It has never been used by the Federal Government, and Poilievre has touted it on the campaign trail to make himself appear tough on crime. Here’s the issue: the abortion law was overturned in 1988 by the Supreme Court because it violated a woman’s “right to life, liberty, and security of the person,” which is in Section 7 of the Charter, and hence vulnerable to the notwithstanding clause. This means Poilievre could introduce personhood, make embryonic research illegal, or even make abortion illegal, and Canada could be stuck with it for five years.

Democracy depends on people following conventions. Once they normalize ignoring those conventions, it is difficult to claw them back. Again, see Exhibit A, the United States.

Conservatives Have Demonstrated they are Coming for Choice

Believe them!

Abortion rights matter. Erosion of these rights are the first step of a very steep and slippery slope. Even if you think abortion doesn't apply to you, remember that if one human right can be taken away, others can, and as history repeatedly demonstrates, will be as well.

Please tell you friends and family about the danger posed by a Poilievre Government. I only touched on abortion here, but there are many other reasons a Conservative Government would be harmful for so many people. If you want to know more about the different parties and reproductive health, check out this toolkit from Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada.

On Monday, April 28, it’s important that we stand up as Canadians and reject what Poilievre stands for and send him and his ilk packing. They are, quite frankly, unCanadian.

Much Love,

Jen