CLC is the political arm of the pro-life movement and it is our job to help you, the grassroots, make informed decisions in the political process whether it be during leadership campaigns, nomination meetings or general elections. It is our belief that pro-life candidates and politicians deserve the support of Canadian pro-lifers regardless of party. We remain non-partisan (because respect for life crosses party lines) and we have always done so. Still, our intentions are often misunderstood, especially during particular leadership races, as support for an individual party. We admire and work with pro-life MPs in all parties and support any pro-life candidate during elections. We also support the Christian Heritage Party, recognizing that they are the only party committed to protecting the sanctity of human life from the moment of conception (fertilization) to natural death. Right now, we are encouraging those who support the Canadian Alliance to become involved and help elect a pro-life, pro-family leader. We are also assisting those within the Tory and Liberal parties who are working on behalf of life and family, and our activities in these areas will become more apparent when formal leadership races are underway. But admittedly, in recent years there has been a lot of grassroots interest in the CA and its high percentage of pro-life MPs.

The CA leadership race is getting down to the wire with four main contenders: former CA leader Stockwell Day, former deputy leader Grant Hill, MP Diane Ablonczy and former Reform MP and National Citizens' Coalition president Stephen Harper. Day and Hill are solidly pro-life - they have both long proclaimed they are pro-life and have demonstrated such convictions as elected officials - Ablonczy is pro-life with exceptions and Harper, who in 1993 said he was "pro-choice" now indicates he is pro-life.

Day, despite the struggles of the past year (mainly the result of a hostile media and attacks from within the party), has maintained his composure and performed admirably the past few months. Unfortunately, many Canadians haven't noticed because of the media's focus on the war on terrorism. Day has finally been able to surround himself with an excellent and loyal staff, has learned on the job and stood up for pro-life principles. In September, he distanced himself (and the party) from then Science and Technology critic Preston Manning's support of embryonic stem cell research. Under Day's leadership the party has offered a coherent criticism of a parliamentary committee's support of limited embryonic stem cell research. Day is strongly pro-life and has increasingly stood up for the sanctity of human life when the issue is raised before Parliament.

Another solidly pro-life leadership hopeful is Grant Hill, but an unfortunate incident with a national newspaper has unduly raised concerns.

Leadership contender Grant Hill contends that the National Post seemed to misquote him as saying he would not promote or permit a referendum on abortion if he was elected prime minister. But since the story appeared, Hill and his press secretary Emma Dillon have both told pro-lifers that he only heard reporter Paul Wells ask him if would promote a referendum on abortion. He told the Post, "I would not." Dillon told The Interim's internet publishing arm LifeSite, "Mr. Hill would permit a referendum but would not promote one. He would not stand in the way of the democratic process." (CLC doesn't believe in referenda on moral issues, but would participate in one to educate the public about abortion if one was held.) Hill told an audience in Gananoque, Ont., (answering a question from CLC Ontario President Mary Ellen Douglas) that "Of course, I would permit social conservatives to have their say on issues that matter to them." In the interview with the Post, Hill reiterated that he is pro-life and he understands that for women facing crisis pregnancies, "It's a gut-wrenching decision." He also acknowledged the fact that post-abortion syndrome - "the after-effects, the depression, the awful feelings that come" - is a major concern. In December, Hill also got into hot water over his frank comments on the health problems faced by homosexuals. He said that he raises the issues of legitimate health concerns associated with that lifestyle because of his medical background as "a loving physician, trying to do the best for his patient."

Diane Ablonczy claims she is pro-life with exceptions and has yet to make abortion an issue in the campaign (and reporters have obliged her, not bringing up the issue in their questions to her) as she focuses on her plan to merge the Tories and CA. Ablonczy supports the long-standing Reform/CA policy of deciding the abortion issue by referendum. Generally, she seems pro-life; in interviews with CLC staff she indicated that she personally holds pro-life views and urges countering growing demand for euthanasia by the promotion of quality palliative care. In December, she lent her name to a CA document opposing the laxity of suggestions by the Standing Committee on Health's recommendations on reproductive and experimental technologies (see January 2002 CLC National News). That is a positive reversal from her position last summer when she supported Manning's comments in favour of embryonic stem cell research.

When Harper ran for Parliament in 1993, he said he was pro-abortion. The media always referred to him as a social moderate for his views, among other things, on abortion and same-sex rights. However, in the midst of the leadership campaign, Harper is making much the same argument as many Alliance members that the party has no official position. In December, Harper told an Ottawa audience that he doesn't believe that the Canadian Alliance Party should put forward legislation on moral issues such as abortion: "I do not believe this party, as a party, can be focused on the abortion issue. As leader, I am not going to focus this party on the abortion issue or on the leader's personal moral and religious views." He later added that he would not stand in the way of private members' initiatives, but reiterated that the CA should not promote a national referendum on abortion or take a side on such a referendum if one took place. In a recent television interview with Michael Coren, Harper said he is personally opposed to taxpayer funding of abortion but emphasized this is a provincial decision.

However, on January 21, the National Post reported that Harper told Global Sunday that he was pro-life. If Harper is indeed now "moderately pro-life" - and we are unsure yet what this newly announced view means - all four leadership candidates in the CA are pro-life in varying degrees.

To vote in the mail-in ballot which begins March 8, party members 16 years or older must have valid paid-up ($10) membership as of March 1. We encourage CA supporters to purchase their membership well in advance of this day to ensure eligibility.

CLC takes the same approach to provincial politics as we do federally - recognizing that the Family Coalition Party is the only party in Ontario that is solidly pro-life. But right now the Ontario P.C. Leadership race has sparked significant interest and political opportunity for social conservatives because of the real prospect of electing candidates who would represent their concerns not just as party leader but as the next provincial premier. We strongly encourage those of you who support or are inclined to support the Ontario Tories to become involved and vote for a new leader.

The election is March 23, 2001 and voting will be staged across the province as well as at a leadership Convention. Each electoral district (constituency) will be worth 100 'Riding Votes', distributed based on the percentage of votes each candidate receives in the riding. To be eligible to cast a vote for the PC Party of Ontario leadership the final date to obtain a $10 membership is February 12 through the head office (can be purchased on line or by telephone) and February 23 through local riding associations. Voters must be 14 years of age or older.

Although the Tory leadership candidates have been fairly quiet about life and family issues during the last month or so of the campaign, we remind supporters that Jim Flaherty has declared himself pro-life, Tony Clement has declared himself pro-life with exceptions (although he refuses to state what those exceptions are exactly) and Ernie Eves, Chris Stockwell and Elizabeth Witmer have announced themselves to be pro-abortion.

The massive shake-up of the federal cabinet by Prime Minister Chretien on January 15 was a mixed bag for pro-lifers, as most of the news is not very good. Feminist Anne McLellan moved from Justice to Health, replacing the fiercely pro-abortion Allan Rock. McLellan is an academic who will rely on Health Department bureaucrats and the notoriously liberal legal establishment for guidance. Rock is the new Industry Minister which may seem benign but which is actually a cause for concern. Before leaving federal politics on January 14, former Industry Minister Brian Tobin was advancing a biotechnology agenda through innovation grants from the feds. Rock, who has spent much time on new reproductive and experimental technologies this past year, may similarly have an interest in promoting unethical embryonic stem cell research or other bio-technologies. John Manley, who is pro-abortion, became the new Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Infrastructure and Crown Corporations. The move is seen as Chretien's coronation of Manley as his successor. Bill Graham, the radically pro-abortion and pro-homosexual rights MP from Rosedale in downtown Toronto, was promoted to Foreign Affairs Minister. With all that our representatives have had to put up with at the UN, matters will probably get worse under Graham.

However, there was a glimmer of hope. Martin Cauchon, whom we rated as pro-life with exceptions in the 2000 election, was promoted from the Revenue to Justice Ministry and two pro-abortion feminists were dropped from the cabinet completely: former Minister for Multiculturalism and Women Hedy Fry and Minister for International Co-operation Maria Minna. We will watch for new directions and opportunities in this new cabinet and keep you apprised of any important developments affecting life and family.

The Globe and Mail (January 3) reported that the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada is urging Canadian doctors to "skirt federal rules" by handing out "just-in-case" prescriptions for the abortifacient morning-after pill (MAP). While B.C. and Quebec both allow pharmacists to dispense the drug so women can buy it directly, doctors in other provinces are circumventing the law by providing open-ended, advance prescriptions. Worse yet, the doctors are flaunting their contempt for existing rules. Ted Broadway, executive director of the Ontario Medical Association bragged, "Lots of doctors are doing it," defending their actions saying they know better than lawmakers what the needs of women are "so we're going and doing it our own way." The SOBC admits to encouraging doctors to flaunt the regulations. André Lalonde, executive vice-president of the Society said, "We have been telling our members to write women an advance prescription for Plan B (the brand name of the leading post-intercourse contraceptive) so they can carry it with them. Furthermore, these medical groups have teamed with pro-abortion groups to lobby the federal government to approve the abortifacient to be purchased directly from pharmacists.

As we have outlined many times before, the MAP is not safe for women to take. While we oppose it being available in the first place, if it is available it is ludicrous for doctors to not have a role in watching and counselling women who use the MAP. This is especially true of those who use them regularly. A doctor's prescription at least allows some sort of monitoring to see how often an individual woman is resorting to this so-called "emergency contraception." MAP side-effects include nausea (50% of all women who take them) and vomiting (20%) and increases the risk of ectopic pregnancy and infertility. A Princeton University website promoting the pills even warns about "thrombophlebitis (bloodclots in the legs), lung clots, heart attack, stroke, liver damage, liver tumor, gall bladder disease, and high blood pressure." As Campaign Life Coalition Ontario President Mary Ellen Douglas told the Globe, "It isn't very responsible for doctors to be giving out advance prescriptions. They hardly prescribe an Aspirin without seeing a patient first, this is just mind-boggling." She warned "pharmacists are being put in a position of prescribing a dangerous drug." We call upon those who claim to be in favour of women's rights and women's health to stand against this very dangerous new trend.

We are also worried about the terms of the debate. The Globe story and the medical establishment have joined abortion advocates in claiming that the MAP will reduce the total number of abortions. This is pure hogwash. It ignores the fact that often times the MAP operates as an abortifacient by preventing the implantation of a newly conceived embryo in the mother's womb. That is nothing less than a form of chemical abortion.

Unfortunately, the federal government has decided to do nothing. Health Canada spokesman Ryan Baker said that the provinces have charge over the "practice of medicine" and thus must determine if it is "ethically sound" to allow the advance prescriptions. Fortunately, Health Canada says it is not ready to designate the abortifacient drugs as non-prescription. "We have to see evidence that it can be safe enough that you can pick it up off a shelf like Sudafed," Mr. Baker said. Unless they accept the pro-abortion propaganda that B.C. and Quebec has, we cannot see how they could consider MAPs safe.

A report from Alberta's Advisory Council on Health, chaired by former federal finance minister Don Mazankowski, opens the door for the possibility of defunding abortion. The report, requested by Alberta Premier Ralph Klein, says that in order to remain sustainable, health care must be downsized including a de-listing of services. Among other things, Mazan-kowski suggested an expert panel be created to determine whether coverage for some medical services should be eliminated. It is our hope that abortion services will be de-listed because (as even CARAL admitted last fall before a Parliamentary Finance Committee meeting) abortion is a social choice, not a medically necessary procedure. Heck, even abortion advocates admit abortion is merely a lifestyle "choice." Polls show that a majority of Canadians do not want abortion paid for out of taxpayers pockets, taking precious health care dollars from necessary, vital, life-saving care. We hope that each province de-lists abortion services, the deliberate taking of a healthy human life, from provincial health care funding. Only truly medically necessary procedures deserve tax funding.

Quebec Minister of State for Science and Technology David Cliche announced a provincial ban on all destructive research involving human embryos. Under new guidelines on ethical research announced on January 10, the creation and use of stem cells extracted from human embryos (which results in their death) is forbidden. So are all forms of human cloning and the creation of animal-human hybrids. Unlike many bans in other countries, the Quebec prohibitions also apply to privately funded research. This also puts the Quebec government ahead of the federal government which is dragging its feet in regulating reproductive and experimental technologies. I have to agree with Campagne Quebec Vie President Gilles Grondin who said it was the best pro-life news we've heard in a long time. Finally a province has the courage to oppose the destruction of human life. We hope other provinces - and the federal government will follow Quebec's lead and refuse to allow embryonic stem cell research.

A BC couple has been found dead along with their disabled son in an apparent murder suicide. Maurice and Belva Baulne, both in their 50s, and their mentally disabled adult son, Reece, 34, were found in a motor-home parked outside their house with a hose hooked up from the vehicle's exhaust which caused carbon monoxide poisoning. A note explained the Baulnes' despair that their declining health would leave them unable to care for their son. Interestingly, the couple refused to place their son in a home. While this case differs in that the son was an adult, this is but the latest in a string of cases in which parents or a parent have killed a child with a disability. Professor Dick Sobsey, Director of the JP Das Developmental Disabilities Centre at the University of Alberta has found that since the high-profile Latimer decision in 1994 in which public sympathy sided with the father who killed his 12-year-old disabled daughter Tracy, the number of homicides involving children with (severe) disabilities has increased by nearly 80% (there being at least 21 cases since 1994).

Now that a year has passed since the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the second-degree conviction of child-murderer Robert Latimer, the federal Cabinet may consider granting him a royal prerogative of mercy by which the Governor General or cabinet could lessen or cancel the remainder of Latimer's 10-year (minimum) sentence. The Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) presented a petition with roughly 60,000 signatures to the office of Solicitor General Lawrence MacAulay in December demanding clemency for Robert Latimer and an end to mandatory minimum prison sentences. And while the presentation of that petition received widespread (and favourable) media coverage, there was no coverage when anti-euthanasia workers and activists for the disabled presented their own petition on November 29 to Parliamentary Pro-life Caucus co-chair Paul Steckle (Lib, Bruce). The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition (EPC) presented its petition "Protecting People With Disabilities - The Supreme Court of Canada Latimer Decision" which had more than 31,500 signatures. EPC Executive Director Alex Schadenberg said he was disappointed with the lack of media attention but told The Interim that despite the huge obstacles (such as lack of finances and the ostensible public support for Latimer) they didn't do too bad. More importantly, he said that the petitions and polls show that the country is deeply divided on the issue of shorter sentences for the killing of people with disabilities (as cruel as this sounds, this is the essence of the debate) and that governments shouldn't change the law when such divisions exist. Thankfully, the federal government seems to accept Schadenberg's argument. Then Justice Minister Anne McLellan responded to the CCLA petition saying "We have very few mandatory minimums, I have no intention of ending the ones we have."

Dolly the famous cloned sheep has developed arthritis at only five and a half years old thus raising new concerns about the safety of cloning. Professor Ian Wilmut, a member of the team at the Roslin Institute which created Dolly, could not rule out that the condition may be related to genetic defects caused by cloning. This raises serious questions about the morality of reproductive cloning if there are increased risks of genetic defects. Dolly is only the most recent - and highest profile - indication of health problems. Animal rights activists have been critical of the callous creation of animals using cloning technology that results in (in the words of Joyce D'Silva, director of Compassion in World Farming) hundreds and hundreds of other cloned lambs who have been born and had malformed hearts, lungs or kidneys. "They have struggled to survive for a few days and then had their lungs filled with fluid and gasped their way to death or had to be put our of their misery by their creators. That is the real story of cloning." Is this what we want for man? Cloning is a moral wrong, but putting aside the sanctity of human life for a moment, it is barbaric to re-create animals through a process that is fraught with so many health problems.

CLC supporter and Roman Catholic Deacon St. Clair McEvenue has written and published Raising Hell: What Stops Parents from Handing on the Faith to Their Children. Sinc outlines what's wrong with society and finds that the family is under assault. Raising Hell is an intelligent, excellently written diagnosis of what's wrong in the culture and an important chapter on what can be done to recover from our social malaise and it's just $15 including shipping. He is generously donating any profits from this book to pro-life. To order, call 416-204-9749 or 1-800-730-5358 and ask for Maria.

The March for Life in Ottawa will be held Friday May 10. Although other details have yet to be announced see the enclosed a candle order form. In recent years we have held a candlelight vigil and for a small donation those of you who cannot be in Ottawa can join us in spirit. Many supporters also have a candle lit for others - those who have passed away, or women who face, or have faced a crisis pregnancy. Donations help defer the costs of staging the march, a vital public witness that abortion is the taking of an innocent life and an important annual tool to send a message to Parliament, the media and average Canadians that the injustice of abortion cannot be allowed to continue. Please plan on joining us in Ottawa on May 10. For more information, call our Toronto office at (416) 204-9749 or 1-800-730-5358.

Yours for Life,
Jim Hughes