NEWS RELEASE

March 31, 2003                                                                                                        For Immediate Release

BREITKREUZ MOTION WILL BE FIRST PRO-LIFE VOTE IN PARLIAMENT IN 12 YEARS

“Doctors take an oath to ‘DO NO HARM’.  The Government should take the same oath,” says Breitkreuz.

Ottawa – Nine years of hard work paid off for Garry Breitkreuz, MP for Yorkton-Melville, when his Private Member’s Motion M-83 was drawn for debate last week.  “Since sending me to Ottawa in 1993, I’ve been working on two issues vital to the vast majority of my constituents – democratic reform and rights for the unborn.  Both converged this week with the selection for debate of my Private Member’s Motion M-83,” said Breitkreuz. 

While Breitkreuz has introduced many pro-life motions in the last nine years and some have even been debated the rules of the House of Commons worked against bringing this important issue to a vote.  After years of work, and with the unanimous consent of all parties, the rules were changed last month that all Private Members’ bills and motions drawn for debate would be votable.  “Now for the first time, Members of Parliament will be voting on many important issues - not just the ones the Liberals decide are important.  The sad fact that unborn children have no rights at all until they are actually born is a prime example of an issue the Liberals have been trying to avoid for the last nine years,” said Breitkreuz.  “Well, they can’t hide from reality any longer.”

Breitkreuz’s Motion M-83 states: That the Standing Committee on Health fully examine, study and report to Parliament on: (a) whether or not abortions are medically necessary for the purpose of maintaining health, preventing disease or diagnosing or treating an injury, illness or disability in accordance with the Canada Health Act; and (b) the health risks for women undergoing abortions compared to women carrying their babies to full term.

Last October, Health Minister Anne McLellan was quoted in a number of newspapers saying: “Our view is that obviously abortion is a medically necessary service.”  But Breitkreuz released a letter from her own department that contradicted the Minister’s statement.  The Health Canada letter admitted they don’t have any evidence showing that abortions are “medically necessary”.  Breitkreuz also produced copies of letters from ten provincial and territorial ministers of health stating that they have NOT completed a risk/benefit analysis on abortion.  Breitkreuz’s motion will be debated for two hours, but Parliament would not be expected to vote on the motion until fall.

“If passed by the House of Commons, my motion would require the Standing Committee on Health to fully examine this question of whether or not an abortion is a “medically necessary” procedure in accordance with the definition in the Canada Health Act.  If the Health Committee’s study reveals that most abortions are not a ‘medically necessary’ procedure, then taxpayers shouldn’t be paying for them,” said Breitkreuz.  “Doctors take an oath to ‘DO NO HARM’.  The government should take the same oath.  We know abortions are deadly for the baby, but everyone needs to know the health risks for the mother.  Every woman and her family should know what these health risks are before they reach a decision to have an abortion.”

An extensive Léger Marketing poll made public last fall shows that only 30% of Canadians are satisfied with the current definition of a human being in the Criminal Code that only protects human life from the point of birth.  “The vote on my motion M-83 will be the first step in getting a more realistic definition and better protection for the rights of the unborn,” concluded Breitkreuz.  

Petition to the House of Commons of Canada for the Private Member's Motion M-83

-30-