Pierre Poilievre is the current front runner for the Conservative Party leadership, and he might owe his leading position in part due to recent claims that he is pro-choice on the abortion issue. But how credible are these declarations, given that Poilievre has been a long-time anti-choice advocate?
The Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada (ARCC) keeps a list of anti-choice Members of Parliament and has always rated Poilievre as anti-choice and continues to do so. Fourteen years ago, Poilievre opposed giving Dr. Henry Morgentaler the Order of Canada. Since then, he has consistently voted in favour of anti-choice private member bills and motions, with just one exception – he voted against Bill C-233 in 2021 (to ban sex selection abortion).
Based on this history, it’s not enough for Poilievre to suddenly start making pro-choice comments in public, because this could be a political gambit to secure the leadership spot. It was the same story with previous Conservative Party leader Erin O’Toole, who claimed to be pro-choice but had courted the anti-abortion movement during his leadership bid, was willing to welcome private member bills on the issue and allow a free vote, and had himself voted in favour of such bills in the past.
Pierre Poilievre notably insisted that he is “pro-choice” and “pro-choix” at the French language debate in May 2022, but it was January 2020 when he first changed his tune. The anti-choice group Campaign Life Coalition explains that Poilievre “abandoned his past pro-life beliefs during the previous leadership race when he was considering running, deciding that the ‘pro-life’ label was no longer useful.” In January 2020, Poilievre told a journalist: “On this issue, I stand with [Stephen] Harper. I do not want to reopen the abortion debate.” If Poilievre’s position is the same as Stephen Harper’s, it must be noted that ARCC has always designated Harper as anti-choice.
It’s reasonable then to wonder if Poilievre’s pro-choice assertions are made for political reasons and to question if they are genuine or trustworthy. After all, Poilievre knows that a public anti-choice stance will not give him the credibility he needs for a victory.
There’s just too many other reasons to doubt Poilievre’s pro-choice claims
Like Erin O’Toole, Poilievre would allow private member bills against abortion to be introduced and would allow a free vote. In a majority Conservative government, such a bill could pass despite his promise to not let that happen. If Poilievre was truly pro-choice, he should instead promise that he would forbid any member of his party from introducing private member bills that challenge human rights.
Poilievre was silent after the draft Roe v. Wade decision was leaked in the U.S. and has not spoken up since to defend abortion rights. He has never discussed the steps he would take to improve abortion access across Canada, such as through more rigorous enforcement of the Canada Health Act to ensure abortion care is available in every region of Canada. A current Lead Now petition with over 20,000 signatures is calling on the Conservative Party leadership to affirm its support for access to abortion and reproductive services. Where is Poilievre’s voice on this issue?
Poilievre has pledged his support for compelling “freedom of expression” on university campuses. This is a dog-whistle to the anti-choice movement and other right-wing groups so they can freely spread propaganda and hatred. Anti-choice groups have a long history of battling to establish their presence at campuses across Canada, such as by applying for club status and funding, displaying graphic imagery, and holding events that spread misinformation.
Outspoken anti-choice MP Garnett Genuis has recommended that social conservatives vote for Poilievre as their second choice after Leslyn Lewis. While Campaign Life Coalition disagrees, anti-choice group RightNow gave Poilievre a respectable passing grade of 68% in their survey. In other words, he’s got a lot going for him in social conservative circles.
Indeed, Poilievre has a generally right-wing voting record on other issues, as indicated by Campaign Life Coalition. He was an opponent of same-sex marriage until publicly changing his stance at exactly the same time he switched from anti-choice to pro-choice. He has recently supported the Freedom Convoy and opposed COVID-19 vaccine mandates, and appears to still oppose the right to medical assistance in dying.
In June 2022, ARCC actually removed five Members of Parliament from its list of anti-choice MPs because they reached out to the group, provided evidence that they were solidly pro-choice, and indicated they had been misled by Bill C-225 in 2016, which would have established some fetal rights (each had voted in favour of only that bill, or an earlier similar one, Bill C-484). These MPs plan to exercise greater caution for future similar bills and are now aware of ARCC’s arguments against Bill C-225.
Poilievre has never reached out to ARCC either now or in the past. But if he were to ask the group to designate him as pro-choice, ARCC would refuse. Given the evidence listed above, he has a considerably higher bar to scale than the MPs that were recently removed. And as a potential party leader, ARCC would apply a higher standard.
In sum, voters should not trust Poilievre’s convenient flip-flop on his abortion views. If he ever became Prime Minister, not only would he allow free votes on private member bills that challenge reproductive rights, it’s likely he would take other regressive steps. For example, he could end the Liberal government’s Sexual and Reproductive Health Fund, withdraw Canada’s foreign aid for reproductive health including safe abortion, and let anti-choice groups continue to spread misinformation and undermine rights, while preserving their charitable tax status.
The best-case scenario is that a Prime Minister Poilievre might do nothing at all on the abortion issue – including not lifting a finger to improve access to abortion care despite the dire need. That’s simply not good enough.
Canadians expect pro-choice politicians to take pro-active steps to defend abortion rights and make sure that every citizen who needs abortion care can access it without barriers, no matter where they live or who they are.
Support rabble today!
We’re so glad you stopped by! Thanks for consuming rabble content this year.
rabble.ca is 100% reader and donor funded, so as an avid reader of our content, we hope you will consider gifting rabble with a donation during our summer fundraiser today.
Whether it be a one-time donation or a small monthly contribution, your support is critical to keep rabble writers producing the work you’ve come to rely on as a part of a healthy media diet.
Become a rabble rouser — donate to rabble.ca today.
Nick Seebruch, editor
