Depending on who you ask, Bill 207 (dubbed the conscience rights bill) is redundant and will change nothing, or it will blow apart abortion access as we know it and send women across Alberta into back alleys. That these claims are mutually exclusive eludes most of the people making them simultaneously..People can fairly oppose the private member’s bill introduced by UCP MLA Dan Williams, but most of the arguments against it nullify the other..The Western Standard gave a platform for debate on the issue that was significantly more thoughtful than that taking place in the provincial legislature. John Carpay – as one might expect – defended the bill, while Cory Morgan picked it apart. Morgan’s argument was less against the substance of the bill than focused on the poor politics of it, which was fair given that the UCP swore up and down every country road in Alberta that they wouldn’t touch issues like this. In their duelling columns, it’s possible to agree with both Carpay (that it’s a good bill), and with Morgan (that it’s bad politics)..It is not possible to argue out of one side of your mouth that the bill is meaningless and changes nothing, and out of the other side that it is a medieval attempt by social conservatives to shackle women barefoot and pregnant to the kitchen counter.. Daniel WilliamsUCP MLA Daniel Williams (source: Twitter) .Early in their term, the Tories made several unilateral changes to the legislature’s rules that manage to weaken the already paltry influence that backbenchers and opposition members have. On the list was a rule to send all private members bills directly to a committee. No government bills are ever required to go to a committee; only private members bills. The cynic in me says that this was done to kill controversial bills out of sight and minimize political damage..When I served in the opposition, we would take every available opportunity to force the government and other parties to vote on issues that made them uncomfortable. You know you will lose the vote, but you force them to get on the record..In this case, rookie MLA Dan Williams appears to have put forward his bill without having clear caucus support first. It’s possible that the bosses told him not to, but that he felt that as a matter of principle it necessary to fight for it anyway. If so, he may be on a fast-track to exile in the Freedom Conservative Party..Kenney has previously cracked the party whip down on internal dissenters on other issues, like cooperation with the NDP in imposing supply management on the energy sector. Much to my surprise, Kenney appears to be allowing a free vote on Bill 207..Soon after the bill was introduced, progressive Conservative cabinet ministers Doug Schweitzer and Leela Aheer strongly condemned it. At the committee, NDP MLAs were joined by a majority of Tory MLAs in voting to kill the bill. Monday afternoon, the bill will find itself on the floor of the legislature and at the mercy of a potential NDP-progressive Conservative majority..In the debate over the bill, the fairest assessment of it is that it doesn’t change very much. Right now, doctors are not required to provide services that conflict with their own ethical codes. For example, doctors opposed to abortion, are not required to perform abortions. The change proposed in Bill 207 is relatively minor: doctors opposed to a particular service would not be required to provide a referral to someone who doesn’t hold the same moral hangups..Critics argue (from one side of their mouth) that this will cause patients in rural parts of Alberta to be effectively denied service. This doesn’t hold water. Abortions do not require referrals. They take a phone call or a walk into a clinic. People requiring other services not supported by their doctors can find another, just as they would with finding a business that meets their needs. This is admittedly more inconvenient in rural Alberta, but so is everything..The bill isn’t the big win for social conservatives that both supporters and critics might believe. It is unlikely that a single abortion that would take place without the bill, will be stopped with it..But examining the bill on its merits, it is worth support and should unite both social conservatives and libertarians. Social conservatives opposed to abortion have an obvious reason to support it as their only win – however marginal – across Canada in 30 years; and libertarians have reason to support it as rolling back any requirement of the state that someone does something against their will. For those of us who believe that doctors should be voluntary servants of their patients and not mandatory servants of the state, the bill rolls back coercion.. Trudeau on WE scandal: Case closed .In any case, it’s doubtful that most MLAs are reading the foundational texts of libertarian philosophy before they vote. More likely, they will vote based on a kneejerk reaction to their support for, or opposition to, abortion. Or more likely still, they will vote based on what is best for their political careers..But for Tory MLAs making their decision based on considered principle – social conservative and libertarian alike – Bill 207 is a small step in the direction of a freer Alberta..Derek Fildebrandt is the Publisher of the Western Standard.publisher@westernstandardonline.com
Depending on who you ask, Bill 207 (dubbed the conscience rights bill) is redundant and will change nothing, or it will blow apart abortion access as we know it and send women across Alberta into back alleys. That these claims are mutually exclusive eludes most of the people making them simultaneously..People can fairly oppose the private member’s bill introduced by UCP MLA Dan Williams, but most of the arguments against it nullify the other..The Western Standard gave a platform for debate on the issue that was significantly more thoughtful than that taking place in the provincial legislature. John Carpay – as one might expect – defended the bill, while Cory Morgan picked it apart. Morgan’s argument was less against the substance of the bill than focused on the poor politics of it, which was fair given that the UCP swore up and down every country road in Alberta that they wouldn’t touch issues like this. In their duelling columns, it’s possible to agree with both Carpay (that it’s a good bill), and with Morgan (that it’s bad politics)..It is not possible to argue out of one side of your mouth that the bill is meaningless and changes nothing, and out of the other side that it is a medieval attempt by social conservatives to shackle women barefoot and pregnant to the kitchen counter.. Daniel WilliamsUCP MLA Daniel Williams (source: Twitter) .Early in their term, the Tories made several unilateral changes to the legislature’s rules that manage to weaken the already paltry influence that backbenchers and opposition members have. On the list was a rule to send all private members bills directly to a committee. No government bills are ever required to go to a committee; only private members bills. The cynic in me says that this was done to kill controversial bills out of sight and minimize political damage..When I served in the opposition, we would take every available opportunity to force the government and other parties to vote on issues that made them uncomfortable. You know you will lose the vote, but you force them to get on the record..In this case, rookie MLA Dan Williams appears to have put forward his bill without having clear caucus support first. It’s possible that the bosses told him not to, but that he felt that as a matter of principle it necessary to fight for it anyway. If so, he may be on a fast-track to exile in the Freedom Conservative Party..Kenney has previously cracked the party whip down on internal dissenters on other issues, like cooperation with the NDP in imposing supply management on the energy sector. Much to my surprise, Kenney appears to be allowing a free vote on Bill 207..Soon after the bill was introduced, progressive Conservative cabinet ministers Doug Schweitzer and Leela Aheer strongly condemned it. At the committee, NDP MLAs were joined by a majority of Tory MLAs in voting to kill the bill. Monday afternoon, the bill will find itself on the floor of the legislature and at the mercy of a potential NDP-progressive Conservative majority..In the debate over the bill, the fairest assessment of it is that it doesn’t change very much. Right now, doctors are not required to provide services that conflict with their own ethical codes. For example, doctors opposed to abortion, are not required to perform abortions. The change proposed in Bill 207 is relatively minor: doctors opposed to a particular service would not be required to provide a referral to someone who doesn’t hold the same moral hangups..Critics argue (from one side of their mouth) that this will cause patients in rural parts of Alberta to be effectively denied service. This doesn’t hold water. Abortions do not require referrals. They take a phone call or a walk into a clinic. People requiring other services not supported by their doctors can find another, just as they would with finding a business that meets their needs. This is admittedly more inconvenient in rural Alberta, but so is everything..The bill isn’t the big win for social conservatives that both supporters and critics might believe. It is unlikely that a single abortion that would take place without the bill, will be stopped with it..But examining the bill on its merits, it is worth support and should unite both social conservatives and libertarians. Social conservatives opposed to abortion have an obvious reason to support it as their only win – however marginal – across Canada in 30 years; and libertarians have reason to support it as rolling back any requirement of the state that someone does something against their will. For those of us who believe that doctors should be voluntary servants of their patients and not mandatory servants of the state, the bill rolls back coercion.. Trudeau on WE scandal: Case closed .In any case, it’s doubtful that most MLAs are reading the foundational texts of libertarian philosophy before they vote. More likely, they will vote based on a kneejerk reaction to their support for, or opposition to, abortion. Or more likely still, they will vote based on what is best for their political careers..But for Tory MLAs making their decision based on considered principle – social conservative and libertarian alike – Bill 207 is a small step in the direction of a freer Alberta..Derek Fildebrandt is the Publisher of the Western Standard.publisher@westernstandardonline.com
