WELL, HE CERTAINLY HAD AN IMPACT.

Henry Morgentaler died a couple of days ago at his home in Toronto, apparently of a heart attack. He was 90 years old. He had suffered a stroke in 1994, and another in 1996 from which he never completely recovered. He is survived by four children, a daughter and a son from his first marriage, a son from his second marriage, and another son from his third.

Morgentaler became the central rallying point and visual symbol of the Canadian pro-choice movement during the 1970s and 80s, but he was much more than a pretty face. During his storied career, despite being hounded, vilified, threatened, prosecuted and imprisoned, he was a very hands-on activist. According to the Ottawa Citizen, “By his own estimation, Morgentaler personally performed at least 80,000 abortions....”

In 1970 Morgentaler was charged with performing an abortion. He countered, not by claiming innocence, but by launching a media campaign to explain why he had performed the procedure. In 1973 a jury acquitted him. Then, in 1974, his acquittal was overturned by the Quebec Court of Appeal. Morgentaler served 10 months in prison, after which he was again acquitted by a jury. Then, in 1976, a third jury acquitted him and the Government of Quebec conceded that the federal abortion law was unenforceable. And finally, in 1988, the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the abortion provision in the Criminal Code on the grounds it violated a woman’s constitutional right to “security of person.”

In light of all this it’s easy to understand why Henry Morgentaler is revered by so many but, in reality, he remains a highly controversial figure. A great many people persist in believing that a human being, whether born or unborn, is just that, a human being. They believe the termination of a pregnancy by abortion is the termination of an innocent human life. According to their understanding, a man who has personally performed 80,000 abortions has actually killed 80,000 innocent human beings. It’s understandable that these people are reluctant to accord hero status to such a man.

I see no reason to doubt that Henry Morgentaler was a courageous and compassionate man. He took great personal risks and suffered many hardships to provide a service to desperate women who did not know where to turn. In the interest of full disclosure, of course, I’m sure he would want us to note that, along with being a social activist, he was also pursuing a very lucrative business opportunity. Though his supporters may deny the relevance of this fact, it does seem to warrant an asterisk when he’s numbered among the Gandhis, Martin Luther Kings, Terry Foxes of the world.

But courage, high motives and a good business sense have never been a guarantee of virtue. If every procedure resulted in the death of someone who also had desperate needs and nowhere to turn, 80,000 procedures represent a horrifying cost. Admittedly these nameless, faceless ciphers were unaware of their need and the possibilities of life denied, but we are not. They trouble the unblinkered conscience and put a serious crimp in the celebration of Henry Morgentaler’s life.

I believe the Quebec Government was right when they declared abortion law unenforceable in Canada, and I think those who oppose abortion must turn away from recourse to legal sanction. The law is a blunt instrument, unsuited to such delicate work. We cannot force anyone to bring a child safely into the world, but we just might love them into doing so.

And this, in the end, is the point of this post. According to the University of Ottawa, Society, the Individual and Medicine, about 100,000 abortions take place in Canada every year. That’s about 31 abortions per 100 live births. About 50% of abortions are performed on women under 25, 64% on single women, and 45% on women who already have children. This, plus a wealth of anecdotal evidence, suggests that many of these women might carry their babies to term if they had the support they needed to do so.

The real problem is not enough love to go around. And that’s where the focus of the pro-life movement needs to be for the foreseeable future.

WIN? HAVE FUN? No, the first rule in any game is DON’T CHEAT.

Many say we have a duty to vote and that this is “a freedom men died for”. I personally think this is a gross oversimplification of the motives of soldiers and the complexity of war, but inasmuch as it is true, surely it implies that we owe more than an X on a ballot every four or five years. We owe it to our country to think about the issues involved in governing it, consider seriously the options on offer, and express our views by voting this way, that way, or not at all. About 40% of Canadians are expressing their views through the third option, and political parties and pundits should take what we are saying seriously.

Only 61.1% of eligible voters actually voted in the last federal election. This was the third lowest turnout on record, and the previous federal election (2008) saw the lowest turnout ever at 58.8%. This is, indeed, something to be concerned about as it indicates a growing disconnect between voters and our democratic institutions.

Politicians and governments seem to feel the only thing that really matters is winning elections. The ideal way to do this, of course, is to faithfully represent constituents and govern well, but there are much easier ways. So what we get is shallow, intemperate and unprincipled attack ads, election fraud (the “robocall scandal” and the “in and out scandal”) and the ludicrous hyper-partisanship that drives the whole mess.

There is a little gem of sports wisdom you hear from time to time: “If you’re not cheating you’re not really trying”.  I must admit that when I first heard this line I laughed. It’s funny if the people saying it realize it’s a joke. But many don’t, failing to understand that cheating is an attack on the game itself, and to win by damaging the game is the height of folly.

The scandals we are seeing in Ottawa today, not to mention Montreal and Toronto, are outrageous because they undermine the whole project of governance. And the scornful abuse our politicians heap on one another undermines the credibility of politicians in general and the entire political enterprise.

I don’t pretend to know how to fix this mess, but the first step might be for politicians in all parties, together with their supporters, to take a little time out to seriously consider how they play the game. 

Can anyone explain to me why voter turnout in this country is so high?

Senator Mike Duffy has resigned from the Tory Caucus, as has Senator Pamela Wallin. Both are gone over problems with expense claims amounting to many thousands of dollars. Duffy’s involve his housing allowance and expenses claimed for Senate business on days when he was campaigning for the Conservative Party and being reimbursed by them. Wallin’s are about her expenses for travel other than to and from her home province. The story is unfolding, but these are more than red flags even now. Duffy has paid back over $90,000, admitting that his housing claims were ineligible while still insisting that the forms are unclear. And it’s reported that Wallin repaid $25,000 just prior to the audit, and approximately $15,000 since the audit began, tacitly admitting that her expense claims too, for whatever reason, are out of wack.

Added to all of this, is the separate, and much more serious matter of Duffy’s $90,000 repayment being covered by a gift from the Prime Minister’s chief of staff, Nigel Wright. On the surface this may seem like the caring gesture of a wealthy friend, but, for obvious reasons, Senators are required to declare all gifts of more that $500 within 30 days. This does not appear to have been done making this a secret payment. This is what is referred to as “under the table”, and it is completely unacceptable. We, the taxpayers, pay Senators, and we pay them very well ($135,200 a year plus benefits and generous pensions). We do this because they work for us, and they work for us because we do it.

Wright has resigned, expressing regret for his actions, while maintaining his motive was “the public interest”. Unfortunately for Mr. Wright, a $90,000 surreptitious payment to a Senator is potentially a criminal act. Now don’t get me wrong, what’s unfortunate for Wright is most fortunate for the Canadian tax payer and necessary for the integrity of Parliament.

Of course, everyone caught up in these matters is insisting that the forms, procedures, requirements, expectations are unclear. And I fear there is more truth in these claims than we might want to believe. Our entire parliamentary system has been increasingly unaccountable for decades, to the point that no one is even asking the most obvious questions. Who is responsible to see that forms are properly filled out and procedures actually followed? Why do we have to wait for an audit to discover that someone has been making bogus expense claims for half a decade? Who signs off on these things?

In every job I’ve ever had there were people responsible to see that I filled out forms and followed procedures correctly. No personal reflection on me. It was the simple recognition that we are all tempted to interpret rules and apply procedures in ways that most benefit us.

When this scandal is over – I do not say “resolved” – there needs to be a thorough rethink of all the checks and safeguards in our entire parliamentary system. This won’t happen of course, any more than it did after the Sponsorship and Airbus scandals, which ended unresolved. And I will continue to scratch my head every 4 or 5 years and wonder why over 60% of eligible voters in Canada actually vote.