CKNW Editorial
for November 10, 2000

Quite apart from how Canadians viewed last night’s debate, the question of the past week is a simple one – how in hell did Stockwell Day get euchred into a debate on abortion of all things?

The answer is a bit complicated but simply stated, Mr Day forgot one of the essential rules of politics – you never let the extreme wing of your party have any part in the campaign. The extremists have nowhere else to go. They are a given. The group you’re after is the middle and you don’t get them by making them think that your party kooks will ever really have a role in governing.

Isn’t this a bit cynical, you may ask? Of course it is. We’re not talking high school social studies here but down and dirty politics. Abortion is, or is at least appears to be a right wing issue. It’s not what you want to have as the focal point of political debate if you want to get votes from the middle and be prime minister.

How did it get there?

By breathtaking naivete on the part of the Alliance. Ted White, the Alliance North Vancouver MP, has apparently tabled a private members bill which would permit citizens’ initiatives if a piddling 3% of the voters so petition for a referendum. This has been married to the Alliance platform supporting referenda and, presto, we have the Liberals claiming that under an Alliance government, 3% will bring forward a national referendum on abortion. Having don’t that, the Liberals, no stranger to election campaigns, have done a masterful job of getting the Alliance leader into a tongue-tied tizzy.

Anyone with half a brain can see the problems with having a general plank on referenda in your platform. However attractive the idea may be to some, you start, according to a recent poll, with 25% of the people against the idea, period. And as with all things, the devil is in the details. What would the question be? Are you or are you not against abortions on demand? Or would you stick in a little catch phrase, saying after consultation with a physician. Would it be all abortions, even when the mother’s health is in danger. Or after she has been raped? Would, if the answer were negative, abortions be unlawful either to have or to perform?

The foregoing are just some of the reasons no government could possibly hold a referendum on the matter … however, because of Alliance’s political stupidity it is this question the Liberals have successfully tacked onto the referendum plank in the Alliance platform.

I happen to agree with referenda as a legitimate political tool in a democracy. But they’re not for every issue. And to have a provision for them federally is pretty tricky to say the least.

In a national referendum, must there be a double majority, the public at large and 6 of the ten provinces? Why not? Just because Ontario might be, for example, against all abortions does that set the rule for the nation when perhaps a majority of provinces are in favour? One might argue that the majority rules but one must remember that abortion not only comes under federal criminal law jurisdiction but also under the provincial power over health care and even property and civil rights.

I think the general rule is, the smaller the jurisdiction to be affected, the greater the argument for referenda. In days of yore when it was municipalities voting for or against liquor, for or against a public enterprise, or other local matters, referenda make sense.

I believe that one should have been used for the basic principles of Nisga’a and that one should be used over transit in the Greater Vancouver Regional District.

This is because however complex the details, the issues can be brought down to a simple, understandable answer. Even on a national basis they can be fairly used. But what we’re talking about here is not just a statement of the general principle that governments should, from time to time, consult the people and that the people should be able to force a vote, but a political screw-up where by one or two elementary leaps of logic, the Liberals have been able to turn a plank for referenda into the allegation that the Alliance is having a referendum on abortion.

It’s been a colosally stupid political blunder which has clearly thrown Mr Day off stride and has forced him to look like the proverbial deer caught in the headlight. He has looked like he hasn’t been telling the truth because he hasn’t been. Worst of all, he has been drawn into an emotion charged debate over a hugely evocative issue which has conveniently permitted the Liberals to dodge issues like graft, corruption and the falling dollar.

Dumb … very dumb indeed.