Bill C484 Who voted yay and what is going to be done
Wed, 2008-03-05 17:34
#1
remind
Bill C484 Who voted yay and what is going to be done
Wed, 2008-03-05 17:34
#2
remind
Okay, Stoffer is a supreme loser, even more so than those Liberal men who voted nay, as at least we know them for who they are. He also is a lying hyprocrit.
Dion made a huge misstep, as even Ignatieff was there to vote NO.
It was annoying that Blaikie was the Speaker and thus avoided the vote.
Antonia is writing about it all for Friday's paper.
Wed, 2008-03-05 17:49
#3
Good for her.
IWD is coming up. Maybe everyone who is planning on going to IWD events in their area should contact the organizers and see whether this can be added to the agenda in a big way if it isn't already.
Wed, 2008-03-05 17:55
#4
remind
Good idea michelle, I am out of my community at the moment and as such will miss events there and so far there is only the business women of Victoria's event on Saturday that I can see in the area, but am going to call the women's resource center tomorrow though and contact my friends in Nanaimo that belong to women's orgs there too later tonight. Had tried earlier but interestingly none were at home.
Wed, 2008-03-05 17:57
#5
remind
Posted by michelle in other thread, but felt it should also be here, as that page will slip off of tat and all michelle stated is valid and needs to happen.
quote:
I want the names of every single MP who voted for the "Unborn Victims of Crime" Act.
And I want to know whether the NDP whipped the vote and Stoffer just defied it, or whether they didn't bother. And if they did, I want to know what's going to happen to Stoffer for defying it. And if they didn't, I'd like to know just why the hell they whipped a vote in FAVOUR of a reactionary crime bill and didn't think legislation about WOMEN'S BODIES and CHOICE wasn't important enough to whip.And I want to know why there isn't a single frigging thing about Bill C-484 on the NDP website.
And I want to know just what the hell is happening to Canada, that a bill with the repugnant anti-choice terminology, "Unborn Victims" in the title can pass SECOND READING.
It's time for us to start screaming bloody murder, ladies. IWD is coming up. Let's make this an issue.
Wed, 2008-03-05 18:00
#6
A friend of mine just wrote the Party this awesome letter:
quote:
To Olivia Chow, my MP, Jack Layton, party leader, et. al.,I have felt excited for this party, hopeful for this party, embarrassed by this party, let down by this party. Through all these things, I have volunteered, donated, voted.
But now I feel betrayed by this party.
Allowing Bill C-484 to pass, your failure to whip this vote, not AT ONCE making clear statements about your dismay and opposition to the bill's passage both on your website and in the press, all of these actions--and inaction--have left me so angry and ideologically disenfranchised from the NDP that I don't know if I can ever, with a clear conscience, vote for a member of this party again. This party that my grandparents helped onto its feet, that my mother has rallied for throughout her life; that I, as an adult, have defended and cheered for and tried to help carry the torch of progressive, pluralist politics; this party has failed me.
This party has failed every single woman in Canada.
I'd suggest that, for your own integrity, you revise your slogan to remove the word "choice".
Gilyan Merry
ex-Member, Trinity Spadina
Wed, 2008-03-05 18:06
#7
remind
Thanks audra, that is exactly how I feel, and in fact it sounds like my parents and family, however, IMV the Liberal's behaviour in this regard is worse than that of the NDP's, Dion did not even show up.
It seems like no one in Ottawa was taking this seriously until we started pushing, who knows how things would have gone had we not.
Does anyone know how the seriously the gay community took this? Because you can bet your boots they are next in line to have their rights trampled and stolen.
Wed, 2008-03-05 18:13
#8
Right on, Audra. And good for your friend. I'm too angry to write to the NDP right now. Too many expletives will find their way into any e-mail I send at the moment.
Maybe tomorrow.
Wed, 2008-03-05 18:15
#9
I'm going to be marching with Canadians For Choice in Toronto's rally and march for International Women's Day on March 8th (this Saturday).
Speaking of which, if anyone wants to join us, here is the information. I would be thrilled and proud to march with any and all babble feminists!
CANADIANS FOR CHOICE - JOIN US IN THE PARADE!
PLACE: OISE, 252 Bloor Street, 11 a.m.
INFO: [email protected] or 416-908-8826
Canadians for Choice Toronto Action Committee will be marching in the abovementioned IWD parade, and hosting a table at the information fair afterwards. This year marks the 20th anniversary of abortion legalization and we are proud to be marching not only in celebration of this momentous occasion, but in redefining and diversifying the movement today!
We need your support in the march! If you are interested in marching with us, please contact Jessica Yee, Chair of the Toronto Action Committee (info above). Or feel free to find us at the march itself - we'll be carrying many visible signs and "PROUDLY PRO-CHOICE" buttons.
[ 06 March 2008: Message edited by: Michelle ]
Wed, 2008-03-05 18:44
#10
The Hansard voting record is [url=http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mod..., about 3/4 of the way down the page. Or do a search on the page for "unborn." Infuriating.
Wed, 2008-03-05 18:44
#11
[url=http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mod...'s the Hansard[/url] - it's about 3/4 of the way down the page, with a list of people who voted yea and nay.
Edited to say: Jinx, buy me a Coke, Tehanu! [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img] Thanks!
[ 05 March 2008: Message edited by: Michelle ]
Wed, 2008-03-05 19:26
#12
My letter to the NDP:
quote:
To Whom It May Concern:I was a member of the NDP a few years back, and despite not having renewed my membership a few years ago, I have continued to vote NDP in every election, federal and provincial. I've been voting exclusively NDP for years now.
So you can imagine my shock when I found absolutely nothing on the NDP web site about Bill C-484. That shock turned to anger when I watched the vote and saw that Peter Stoffer voted FOR it, and that this vote didn't appear to be whipped.
This is a bill with "Unborn Victims" in the title. This is blatant and classic anti-choice rhetoric. This is the phrase anti-choicers use to describe aborted fetuses.
These are women's bodies and women's rights we're talking about here, and the NDP didn't think it was important enough to mention this bill even once on your web site? Didn't think it was important enough to whip the vote?
How is it that you managed to whip your MPs into voting WITH the Conservatives on a regressive, reactionary crime bill (and disciplined the one principled member of your caucus who voted against it) but decided that this anti-choice bill was nothing important?
I am appalled. And extremely angry. Please don't count on my vote any longer, unless I can count on the NDP to represent me on the issues most important to me and to all women who think fighting for our right to control our own bodies is important.
Choice is a dealbreaker issue. It's time for the NDP to start acting like a progressive, left-wing party again. You can start by protecting my body and my rights from anti-choice zealots in the Conservative Party.
Sincerely, etc.
Wed, 2008-03-05 19:28
#13
Well done, Michelle. And thanks for passing that letter along, Audra.
Wed, 2008-03-05 20:09
#14
remind
The %#@@! Liberals who voted for are:
Raymond Bonin Telephone: (613) 995-9107
EMail: [email protected]
John Cannis (613) 992-6823
EMail: [email protected]
Hon. Raymond Chan (613) 995-2021
EMail: [email protected]
Hon. Roy Cullen (613) 995-4702
EMail: [email protected]
Sukh Dhaliwal (613) 992-0666
EMail: [email protected]
Hon. Albina Guarnieri (613) 996-0420
EMail: [email protected]
^ * lone female
Hon. Charles Hubbard (613) 992-5335
EMail: [email protected]
Hon. Jim Karygiannis (613) 992-4501
EMail: [email protected]
Derek Lee (613) 996-9681
EMail: [email protected]
Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (613) 995-9325
EMail: [email protected]
Hon. Gurbax Malhi (613) 992-9105
EMail: [email protected]
Hon. John McKay (613) 992-1447
EMail: [email protected]
Hon. Joe McGuire (613) 992-9223
EMail: [email protected]
Hon. Dan McTeague (613) 995-8082
EMail: [email protected]
Hon. Shawn Murphy (613) 996-4714
EMail: [email protected]
Massimo Pacetti (613) 995-9414
EMail: [email protected]
Francis Scarpaleggia (613) 995-8281
EMail: [email protected]
Hon. Raymond Simard (613) 995-0579
EMail: [email protected]
Lloyd St. Amand (613) 992-3118
EMail: [email protected]
Paul Steckle 613) 992-8234
EMail: [email protected]
Paul Szabo (613) 992-4848
EMail: [email protected]
Hon. Robert Thibault (613) 995-5711
EMail: [email protected]
Alan Tonks (613) 995-0777
EMail: [email protected]
Roger Valley (613) 996-1161
EMail: [email protected]
Tom Wappel (613) 995-0284
EMail: [email protected]
Borys Wrzesnewskyj (613) 947-5000
EMail: [email protected]
Paul Zed was abscent as was: Dion, Bryon Wilfert, Volpe, Nancy Karetak-Lindell, Hon. Mark Eyking, Ujjal Dosanjh (who was there for other votes), Denis Coderre, Brenda Chamberlain, Gerry Byrne.
The CPC females voting nay were: Sylvie Boucher Josee Vernier and Hon. Lawrence Cannon, Gordon O'Connor, were the 2 males.
The Independants voted nay.
I never checked the Bloc but when watching it seemed all who were there voted nay.
The rest of course were all CPC.
*** thanks skdadl [img]smile.gif" border="0[/img]
ETA to add Verner as another CPC who voted nay my apologies Josee Verner
ETD: to take Gord Brown out as he is CPC and remove Simms from being called as abscent. [img]redface.gif" border="0[/img] It seems a double check was not good enough, needed a third gouing over, my apologies to Scott Simms.
[ 06 March 2008: Message edited by: remind ]
Wed, 2008-03-05 20:11
#15
I'm too lazy to look up who is in which party. Did the Bloc whip the vote? The Cons?
The optimist in me hopes that the Bill will be amended in committee to remove all references to unborn victims and will make knowingly assaulting a pregnant women an aggravating factor to be considered in sentencing - nothing more, nothing less.
The realist in me thinks that this might actually pass. Fast forward to the first person charged with harming an "unborn victim". His lawyer will surely launch a charter challenge against the law.
Wed, 2008-03-05 20:18
#16
remind
Summer we crossed posted look above your post for the breakdown, minus Stoffer of course the lone NDP loser.
Wed, 2008-03-05 20:27
#17
thanks Remind!
Wed, 2008-03-05 20:38
#18
The cancellation of the Court Challenges program is pretty upsetting right now.
Wed, 2008-03-05 22:29
#19
remind
quote:
Originally posted by audra trower williams:[b]The cancellation of the Court Challenges program is pretty upsetting right now.[/b]
Ya, one can't help understand that this was planned in advance.
Thu, 2008-03-06 02:50
#20
quote:
Originally posted by remind:
[b]The rest of course were all CPC.[/b]
No they weren't. Let's not forget dear NDP MP Peter Stoffer! (I know you didn't forget about him, but just in case anyone's reading your post and thinks it was just Liberals and Conservatives who voted yes.)
[ 06 March 2008: Message edited by: Michelle ]
Thu, 2008-03-06 03:27
#21
rural - Francesca
I can't do too much with Paul Steckle - he's a stanuch pro-lifer and won't listen at all. But he's done at the next election - retiring - so there is hope.
Another of my MP's is a con and he and I have been trading phone calls, but not connecting
Thu, 2008-03-06 03:47
#22
Le T
A quick a sloppy google before going to work...
seems like only anti-choice blogs are reporting on this right now. Nothing in the MSM and nothing critical of the bill.
Thu, 2008-03-06 03:56
#23
I don't think so - pro-choice and feminist blogs are reporting on it too. Debra's group of gals over at Bread 'N' Roses and Birth Pangs are all over it, for starters. And quite a few progressive bloggers are talking about it too.
But you're right - no MSM have been on it. That needs to change.
Thu, 2008-03-06 04:58
#24
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
[b]I'm going to be marching with Canadians For Choice in Toronto's rally and march for International Women's Day on March 8th (this Saturday).Speaking of which, if anyone wants to join us, here is the information. I would be thrilled and proud to march with any and all babble feminists![/b]
Is this a women's-only march or are men allowed to join as well? If so, I'm interested. If not, I'll be there in spirit.
Thu, 2008-03-06 05:10
#25
M. Spector
The [url=http://www.canadiansforchoice.ca/index2.html]Canadians for Choice[/url] website also dropped the ball on Bill C484, as there is no mention of it anywhere.
So it wasn't just the NDP asleep at the switch.
Not so the [url=http://www.arcc-cdac.ca/home.html]Abortion Rights Coalition[/url].
[ 06 March 2008: Message edited by: M. Spector ]
Thu, 2008-03-06 05:49
#26
quote:
The Canadians for Choice website also dropped the ball on Bill C484, as there is no mention of it anywhere.
I think their charity organization status forbids them to do political lobbying. But they work closely with ARCC.
Thu, 2008-03-06 05:54
#27
quote:
Originally posted by Will S:
[b]Is this a women's-only march or are men allowed to join as well? If so, I'm interested. If not, I'll be there in spirit.[/b]
I don't think it's women only - it doesn't say so on the web site.
M. Spector, I noticed that yesterday, that CFC doesn't have it on their web site. However, I think that comparing a tiny non-profit with extremely limited resources and THE FEDERAL NDP whose JOB it is to, you know, keep on top of what goes on in PARLIAMENT is just a little bit disingenuous, don't you?
P.S. That hadn't occurred to me, Martin. Makes sense.
[ 06 March 2008: Message edited by: Michelle ]
Thu, 2008-03-06 05:58
#28
If anyone feels like writing those wonderful YEA-sayers and absentee cowards in the Opposition, feel free to cut and paste.
(Edited to integrate corrections)
Liberal YEA-sayers:
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected],[email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]
NPD Nay-sayer:
[email protected]
Absentees:
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]
PLEASE WRITE THESE PEOPLE!
[ 08 March 2008: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]
Thu, 2008-03-06 06:03
#29
According to Antonia Zerbisias over on BnR, Stephane Dion couldn't make it to the vote because he was busy playing host at his wife's International Women's Day party for female journalists last night.
Having cocktails and hobnobbing with elite women from the press at a photo-op while NOT SHOWING UP to a vote on an anti-choice bill is not supporting women!
[url=http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/309496]The party is mentioned in this article.[/url] (h/t BnR)
[ 06 March 2008: Message edited by: Michelle ]
Thu, 2008-03-06 06:06
#30
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
[b]Having cocktails and hobnobbing with elite women while NOT SHOWING UP to a vote on an anti-choice bill is not supporting women![/b]
The women may have been supporting Dion, depending on the number of cocktails.
Thu, 2008-03-06 06:20
#31
M. Spector
quote:
Originally posted by martin dufresne:
[b]I think their charity organization status forbids them to do political lobbying.[/b]
Does it forbid them to participate in pro-choice demonstrations?
Thu, 2008-03-06 06:52
#32
M. Spector
The bill has been referred to the [url=http://cmte.parl.gc.ca/cmte/CommitteeList.aspx?Lang=1&PARLSES=392&JNT=0&... Committee on Justice and Human Rights[/url]
The following are the voting members of the Committee. All voted in the House in favour of the bill on Second Reading, except those marked with an asterisk, who voted against.
CHAIR
Art Hanger (C)
VICE-CHAIRS
*Rйal Mйnard (BQ)
*Brian Murphy (L)
MEMBERS
*Larry Bagnell (L)
Blaine Calkins (C)
*Joe Comartin (NDP)
Rick Dykstra (C)
*Carole Freeman (BQ)
*Dominic LeBlanc (L)
Derek Lee (L)
Rob Moore (C)
Daniel Petit (C)
[ 06 March 2008: Message edited by: M. Spector ]
Thu, 2008-03-06 06:53
#33
N. Beltov, Canadians for Choice does essential work. e.g. referring women to abortion facilities. Is it really for us males to give them grief about the constraints of Canadian legislation?
[url=http://www.canadiansforchoice.ca/goals.html]C for C Goals and Objectives[/url]
[ 06 March 2008: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]
Thu, 2008-03-06 06:56
#34
M. Spector
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
[b]However, I think that comparing a tiny non-profit with extremely limited resources and THE FEDERAL NDP whose JOB it is to, you know, keep on top of what goes on in PARLIAMENT is just a little bit disingenuous, don't you?[/b]
No, I don't.
Are you saying the reason the CFC didn't put it on their website is that they didn't have enough resources to do so?
Or that they didn't even know about it because of lack of resources? I have zero resources, and I knew about it. So did you.
Thu, 2008-03-06 07:00
#35
remind
It was Shawn Murphy who voted for it, NOT Brian Murphy who is on the committee. The committee is split evenly at 6 yays and nays. And we do not want to yell at Brian Murphy who indeeed voted nay.
[ 06 March 2008: Message edited by: remind ]
Thu, 2008-03-06 07:04
#36
quote:
Originally posted by remind:
[b]It was Shawn Murphy who voted against it, NOT Brian Murphy who is on the committee. The committee is split evenly at 6 yays and nays. And we do not want to yell at Brian Murphy who indeeed voted nay.[/b]
Um, so did Brian Murphy vote yea or nay? You've said it both ways, remind.
Thu, 2008-03-06 07:06
#37
M. Spector
Brian voted NAY. Thanks for the correction.
Thu, 2008-03-06 07:06
#38
remind
Ooops, thank you unionist Shawn Murphy voted for it Brian Murphy against it.
Thu, 2008-03-06 09:05
#39
remind
The Globe and Mail had a small report on it, but they are out to lunch on it starting with their headline.
They reported it as the first reading when it is the second reading and thereby goes to committee now. [img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img]
quote:
Ottawa -- A private member's bill that would amend the Criminal Code to make harming a fetus a crime passed first reading yesterday.
[url=http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080306.NATS06-1/TPSto... than 20 Liberals voted for it. [/url]
There were close to 30 Liberal MPs who voted yay (27), and it would've been more accurate than saying "more than 20". And they also disregarded the 14, or so, who were abscent.
Of note here, I did not put Stronach's name, nor Paul Martin's name, into the equation of those Liberals who were missing for the vote.
[ 06 March 2008: Message edited by: remind ]
Thu, 2008-03-06 09:10
#40
I am going to email these losers who voted for the "Unborn Victims of Crime" Act and let these idiots have it. Thanks for the email addresses. Unbelievable.
Only 2 bloody years of a conservative minority government and we're already into fighting many cultural wars that Americans have been fighting for awhile now.
[ 06 March 2008: Message edited by: mary123 ]
Thu, 2008-03-06 09:20
#41
quote:
Originally posted by martin dufresne:
[b]Canadians for Choice does essential work. e.g. referring women to abortion facilities. Is it really for us males to give them grief about the constraints of Canadian legislation?
[url=http://www.canadiansforchoice.ca/goals.html]C for C Goals and Objectives[/url][/b]
Exactly. Sorry, M. Spector, but I'm not going to continue this duel with you re: CFC. They're allies in the fight for choice. Here, we have three federal parties with members who voted directly AGAINST choice. That's where I'm focusing my energy today.
Thu, 2008-03-06 11:13
#42
A few corrections:
Gord Brown is a Conservative, not a Liberal.
John Maloney (Lib) also voted 'yea'.
Scott Simms (Lib) did show up and voted 'nay', so don't yell at him.
The official vote is recorded here.
Weirdly, all six Scarborough MPs (all Liberals) voted in favour of the bill. Is there some sort of crypto-conservative Scarborough voting bloc we don't know about?
Thu, 2008-03-06 13:51
#43
I feel very badly as I never really took notice of this nonsense. But for Babble, it may have passed me by. That seems is a problem for progressives and feminists.
What a piece of nonsense. this is. Thank you for making this an issue and please allow me to ensure I will try to part of "the solution".
This is is foolish and idiotic. Only those without appreciation of the implications would agree. Supporting everyone is also supporting the rights of women. Full stop.
Thu, 2008-03-06 14:08
#44
remind
quote:
Originally posted by runesmith:
[b]Weirdly, all six Scarborough MPs (all Liberals) voted in favour of the bill. Is there some sort of crypto-conservative Scarborough voting bloc we don't know about?[/b]
I know, I saw that last night when going over the 2 lists, trying to figure what party caucus member voted yay or nay, and was getting angier with each Liberal Ontario MP. For a moment there I was yelling mentally "fuck that, we need to separate if Ontario MPs are so overwhelmingly vote to deny women's equality rights". However, I calmed down and realized we would be still stuck with a whack load of our own here in BC. [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]
Oh, forgot to say thank you for pointing out the correction needed regarding Scott Simms being there, not abscent and that Gord Brown is a CPC not Liberal.
It matters not who voted nay in the Liberal caucus, it matters who voted yay.
[ 06 March 2008: Message edited by: remind ]
Thu, 2008-03-06 14:12
#45
quote:
Is there some sort of crypto-conservative Scarborough voting bloc we don't know about?
Well I knew about it, but I have to work in Scarborough every day.
Thu, 2008-03-06 14:44
#46
A Suggestion:
This is a very important thread and more people need to know and get angry about this. Doesn't this deserve to be in the National News or in the Canadian News section and give it more publicity as well?
Thu, 2008-03-06 14:46
#47
remind
Was over at BnR having a read and found this link:
quote:
THE CPC ANNOUNCE NEW TAX CREDIT - THE FETUS IS NOW A TAX DEDUCTABLE CREDIT
[url=http://thewingnuterer.blogspot.com/2008/03/cpc-announce-new-tax-credit-f... Harper Government will now allow all pregnant mother to claim the unborn as a dependent on their taxes. [/url]
In actual fact, wingnutter may have a point, if this Bill passes, a fetus will be declared a person and thus will have to be acknowledged as a dependant tax deduction prior to be born alive.
[ 06 March 2008: Message edited by: remind ]
Thu, 2008-03-06 14:51
#48
remind
The Star wades in before Antonia's article tomorrow, softening things for the Liberals
[img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img]
quote:
At around 8 p.m., Stephane Dion informally addressed the group at his house. He made mention of the bill's passing and acknowledged the deep disappointment in the room. But he assured his women MPs that if the vote had been on actually passing the bill, Liberals would have turned out in force to defeat it. I detected a little sheepishness -- the Liberals not turning up for votes in the House is starting to be a sensitive topic. As it should be.
[url=http://thestar.blogs.com/politics/2008/03/stand-on-bill-c.html]http://th...
Thu, 2008-03-06 14:55
#49
remind
quote:
Originally posted by mary123:
[b]A Suggestion:This is a very important thread and more people need to know and get angry about this. Doesn't this deserve to be in the National News or in the Canadian News section and give it more publicity as well?[/b]
Excuse me? Are you actually stating that because it is in the feminist forum that it is in a second class place and that things are put in the feminist forum because they are NOT worth putting elsewhere?
[ 06 March 2008: Message edited by: remind ]
Thu, 2008-03-06 15:11
#50
quote:
Originally posted by remind:
[b]Excuse me? Are you actually stating that because it is in the feminist forum that it is in a second class place and that things are put in the feminist forum because they are NOT worth putting elsewhere?
[ 06 March 2008: Message edited by: remind ][/b]
No you said that.
When I only have a little time I quickly glance over at the popular National News and Canadian News sections of babble. I wasn't aware of the results of this whole "Bill C484 debacle" until I came to the feminism forum. I assume people are like me and that when pressed for time go to the more "popular" sections for lack of a better word.
I believe this is a damn important issue and want ALL OF CANADA to be aware of it. I thought my suggestion would help publicize the issue more, tis all.
I am assuming the News and Canadian news section are the most popular sections and most read sections of babble. I know, I know never assume!
Thu, 2008-03-06 15:13
#51
M. Spector
You might find it more efficient to check out [url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_daily]Today's Active Topics[/url], mary 123.
Just a suggestion... [img]smile.gif" border="0[/img]
[ 06 March 2008: Message edited by: M. Spector ]