fbpx
Connect with us

Features

CARPAY vs. MORGAN: Alberta’s conscience rights bill

John Carpay and Cory Morgan debate the UCP’s Bill 207, conscience rights legislation.

mm

Published

on

The new Western Standard is proud to announce the return of one of our most popular features from the original magazine: Western Standard Debates.

In this feature, we will select prominent conservatives and libertarians and give them a topic which may divide them to debate. Both authors agreed to share their original notes with one another, and then their drafts, so that they can rebut their opponent’s main points as best they can.

In the first return of the Western Standard Debates, John Carpay and Cory Morgan tackle the Alberta UCP’s Bill 207, generally known as the “conscience rights bill.”

We welcome readers to comment below with their own thoughts and suggest future topics for debate.

Cory Morgan

John Carpay

Last spring, I and many thousands of other Albertans strongly and vocally supported the United Conservative Party. As is typical, the left claimed that conservatives held a hidden agenda to legislate on issues such as abortion. Kenney directly addressed that in February in no uncertain terms saying, “A United Conservative government will not address this issue, will not engage in this debate, will not initiate legislation.” Here we are less than a year later watching our legislature getting mired in the abortion debate due to Bill 207. 

Conscience rights for medical practitioners are already strongly protected by the Charter and by their professional associations. No doctor or nurse is forced to take part in abortions or assisted death nor are they losing their jobs for refusing to do so. I could not find any examples or complaints from Alberta medical providers on this issue so one has to wonder if there is an issue that needs to be addressed at all with further legislation.

The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta lays out the obligations of practitioners quite clearly:

“When Charter freedom of conscience and religion prevent a regulated member from providing or offering access to information about a legally available medical or surgical treatment or service, the regulated member must ensure that the patient who seeks such advice or medical care is offered timely access to:

  • a regulated member who is willing to provide the medical treatment, service or information; or
  • a resource that will provide accurate information about all available medical options.”

Simple and clear. Nobody is forced to do any procedure which conflicts with their conscience and all they have to do is provide a referral. In Alberta that referral could be something as simple as giving the patient a brochure directing them to another provider. This is not unreasonable. 

Bill 207 wants to remove the obligation of referral even from medical practitioners. This is an attempt through incremental hindrance to keep patients from finding their way to services that may offend the conscience of the provider. This may sound minor but for a stressed and frightened young patient dealing with an unplanned pregnancy or a person living in chronic pain to the point of considering assisted death, these hindrances can turn into outright roadblocks. They may not have the time or ability to research and find the most appropriate medical provider to fill their needs. That is of course exactly what the proponents of this bill are counting on. 

If we are talking about services such as waxing or meat cutting services, it is not unreasonable for service providers to decline service to people based on conscience issues without offering guidance as to where those services can be alternatively found. Medical services however are an entirely different matter, particularly when the government holds a monopoly over it. A person may not consider suicide for lack of having their genitals waxed, but a confused young girl seeking birth control options may. For a person in pain and medical distress who is considering medically assisted death, being forced to dig around and research to find a provider is more than a simple inconvenience.

Proponents of this bill are guided by ideology and are of the “if it saves just one life” mentality. They are willing to derail an entire legislature in the hope of getting a bill through which may just hinder patients enough that they choose to take an unplanned pregnancy to term, or may choose to die a slow agonizing death rather than get medical assistance with it. 

Politically, the damage caused by this bill may be catastrophic. If enough government members support this pointless bill to become legislation, the election of conservative governments across the entire nation will become much more difficult. How can we federally campaign against hidden agenda accusations when a provincial government just passed backdoor legislation to hinder abortion? How can we say (and we did) that a conservative government will never change or legislate on these things?  

The first reading of the bill was essentially a formality. The NDP set a trap by calling for a vote on the reading (an uncommon practice) and the UCP fell right into it. By all appearances from that vote, it looked like the UCP is fully behind this bill. During second and possibly third readings we will be able to see whether or not the UCP government wants to dive into the abortion debate or kill this bill in its tracks. If they pass this legislation, the accusations of a hidden agenda will have been proven true. This was never campaigned upon and yet another party split may come of it. We have many issues more important to deal with in the legislature than opening up dead issues and bringing them back to life.

Cory Morgan is a columnist for the Western Standard and a business owner in Pridis, Alberta. 

 

Bill 207 enshrines “freedom of conscience and religion” – protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms– for Alberta’s health care providers. For many years, Premier Jason Kenney has consistently and publicly supported protecting freedom of conscience, so nobody should be surprised if he supports this Private Member’s Bill.

Bill 207 will not limit patient access to abortion. Firstly, abortion does not require a referral, as any abortion clinic will tell you when you call and ask. Secondly, even if abortion did require a referral, if one physician refuses to provide such referral then the patient would simply go to another doctor. Inconvenient? Yes, absolutely. In a free country, the right to honour one’s conscience trumps someone else’s interest in not being inconvenienced.

Forcing someone to do something that they believe to be wrong is serious business. It is also a hallmark of totalitarian states. But in free and democratic societies, the government will bend over backwards to avoid coercing citizens to participate in what they see as evil. This is why the Charter describes freedom of conscience and religion as “fundamental,” and mentions it ahead of the freedoms of expression, association and peaceful assembly.

When a democracy is at war, the pacifists who oppose killing another human being will not be required by government to serve on the front lines and shoot at foreign troops. A democracy can continue with its war efforts without requiring every citizen to be willing to kill enemy soldiers.

Just because pork is legal and popular does not mean that all butchers should be forced, by law, to sell it. Some Muslim and Orthodox Jewish butchers will refuse to handle or sell pork, and no doubt this refusal will inconvenience some customers. The disappointed customers will need to go elsewhere, upon learning that the store they travelled to does not carry what they want.

The BC Human Rights Tribunal recently issued a pro-freedom ruling that female estheticians could refuse to wax the male genitalia of Jessica (Jonathan) Yaniv, for religious and other reasons. Yaniv will be inconvenienced by having to locate a waxologist who is willing and able to provide a Brazilian bikini wax for male genitals. But not forcing women to handle male genitalia is more important than sparing someone the inconvenience of going elsewhere.

Put simply: in a free society, you do not have the right to require other people to do things that they do not wish to do. In a free country, nobody has a legal right to be free from the inconvenience of needing to look elsewhere for a product or service. This respect for freedom is consistent with – or is supposed to be consistent with – the philosophy of the United Conservative Party.

Bill 207 protects doctors from being required to assist their patients in committing suicide, as one example of a medical service that some doctors see as wrong. Many non-religious doctors believe on conscientious grounds that suicide is not a valid or legitimate medical treatment.

Providing a referral is active participation. This is why the Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario prohibits doctors from performing female genital mutilation (FGM) and also prohibits doctors from referring for this medical service. If it’s wrong to remove portions of a young girl’s genitals, then it’s also wrong to refer her to another doctor who will provide that same service.  As in Ontario, Alberta’s College states that “no physician should perform such procedures, irrespective of cultural norms in other societies, and no physician should be complicit in allowing such procedures to go ahead.” To refer for FGM is to be complicit in FGM. Requiring doctors to refer for a service they believe to be wrong is to violate the conscience of doctors.

And yet the Alberta College of Physicians and Surgeons requires doctors to refer for assisted suicide. Bill 207 addresses this problem by protecting the fundamental Charter freedoms of doctors and other health care providers. A vote for Bill 2017 is a vote for freedom.

John Carpay is a columnist with the Western Standard and the President of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms.

Features

McCOLL: Canada’s airforce replacement program getting it half right, half wrong

Alex McColl on how the very mixed bag of Canada’s airforce replacement programs.

mm

Published

on

On June 6, the Department of National Defence (DND) announced that the two oldest 1980s-era Bombardier VIP jets (the Challenger 601) would be replaced with a pair of new sole-sourced Bombardier Challenger 650 jets. The old Challengers no longer meet international civil aviation standards nor could they be affordably upgraded. 

While some have criticized the Challenger fleet, Canadians should be proud of how much money the affordable Challengers have saved the taxpayer.

The United States Air Force (USAF) spends more on a single 8-hour Air Force One (a Boeing 747) flight than the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) spent on the governor general’s 109 Challenger flights between April 2011 and February 2014. That said, the Liberal government has taken a step backwards on the VIP jet file by missing an opportunity.

The Bombardier Global VIP jet can carry more people, can fly farther (over 11,000 km), and is a proven military platform. Finland is currently evaluating the new Bombardier/Saab GlobalEye as a component of Saab’s bid to replace Finland’s F/A-18 Hornet fighter jets. The Global is also the basis for the Bombardier/Saab Swordfish maritime patrol jet that is the leading contender to replace Canada’s aging CP-140 aircraft.

Canada needs to keep RCAF operating costs affordable while adding capabilities. A proven way to save money is to reduce the variety of jets in service. It would be better to replace all four Challengers with new sole-sourced Bombardier Global jets and six Bombarder/Saab GlobalEye airborne radar jets. The government should also announce that the CP-140 maritime patrol aircraft will be replaced in the 2030s by Bombardier/Saab Swordfish jets. This would both enhance our military capabilities while reassuring potential export customers that militarized Global jets are a safe investment.

On Tuesday June 16, the United States Government announced the approval of a foreign military sale to Canada of approximately $862.3 million (USD) worth of CF-18 upgrades and weapons. Phase one of Canada’s Hornet Extension Project will upgrade avionics and mission systems to extend the life of up to 94 CF-18s until 2032. Phase two will use the upgrades to enhance the combat capabilities of up to 36 CF-18s.

The upgrades quote includes fifty of the latest AIM-9X sidewinder missiles, twenty AGM-154C glide bombs, thirty-eight APG-79(v)4 AESA radars, thirty Improved Tactical Air Launched Decoys (ITALD), and a host of other upgrades to bring Canada’s CF-18A jets to an equivalent standard with the United States Marine Corps (USMC) F/A-18C Hornets. The Marines plan to upgrade 98 of their Hornets – 7 squadrons worth – with these systems between 2020 and 2022. The new radar is nearly identical to the APG-79 AESA radar found in the Super Hornet.

Phase one and the addition of the AIM-9X missile should be considered the bare minimum required to keep the CF-18 fleet flying to 2032, when Canada’s next fighter is scheduled to reach full operational capability. Phase two will offer significantly enhanced combat capabilities and give RCAF pilots some valuable experience with modern radars. The Department of National Defence (DND) released a budget estimate of $500 million for phase one of the Hornet Extension Project and a total cost – including phase two – of $1.3 billion.

All four of the candidates for the leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada have promised to increase military spending. During the June 18th leadership debate, Dr. Lewis – the only candidate to not commit to a 2 per cent of GDP spending target – questioned the commitment of MacKay and O’Toole by pointing out that the Harper Government didn’t get it done despite its own commitment.

Even proponents of sole sourcing the F-35 – like Peter MacKay – should support the CF-18 phase two upgrade. The May 2020 United States Government Accountability Office report on the F-35 outlined issues and cost overruns that have delayed the availability of fully capable Block 4 F-35s until 2026. 

This delay – combined with the fact that allied nations are already in the order queue – casts serious doubts on if Lockheed Martin could even meet Canada’s CF-18 replacement timelines. Lockheed Martin could deliver Block 3 aircraft, but that would impose considerable future upgrade costs on Canadian taxpayers. The rational course of action would be to delay an F-35 purchase until Block 4 jets are available. 

If Conservatives are serious about rearming the RCAF and reaching Canada’s NATO spending targets, then they should demand that phase two of the Hornet Extension Project is fully funded and delivered on time. Conservatives should also push the Liberals to do more and replace the aging Challenger and CP-140 aircraft with a combined fleet of Bombardier Global based VIP, airborne radar, and maritime patrol jets.

Canada’s airforce fleet replacements – and the fighter replacement in particular – have been a morass of bureaucrat inertia and political interference, but the there is finally a glimmer of hope that they might get it right.

Alex McColl is the National Defence Columnist with the Western Standard and a Canadian military analyst

Continue Reading

Features

Inside Seattle’s CHAZ – where warlords rule and vegan food is in short supply

At the heart of the CHAZ, is a Seattle police precinct, abandoned by officers and now being used by protesters, oh, and warlords.

mm

Published

on

As a strategy for American urban renewal, it’s certainly an interesting experiment.

Thousands of protesters – many hailing from the far-left ANTIFA terrorist organization – have taken over a six-square block area of Seattle – now dubbed the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone (CHAZ) – where no police officers are allowed.

Just 24 hours a day of protesting, music, dancing and communing without a cop in sight, they have already run out of food, putting out a plea for “vegan meat alternatives” and other soy-based food donations.

At the heart of the CHAZ is a Seattle police precinct, abandoned by officers and now being used by gun-tooting warlords who have established themselves as the new keepers of law and order.

CHAZ

They have a list of demands, including the “abolition” of the Seattle Police Department and its attached court system, free college for all people in the state, as well as “the abolition of imprisonment, generally speaking, but especially the abolition of both youth prisons and privately-owned, for-profit prisons.”

 

The streets are apparently controlled by a hip hop artist-turned-warlord by the name of Raz Simone, who has established an armed private police force that does not hesitate to dole out beatings to communal scofflaws.

Another video shows Raz and friends confronting a man for making unauthorized graffiti on Raz’s turf, which results in the “police” stealing the man’s phone, breaking his glasses, and reportedly repeatedly kicking him in the head.

“We are the police of this community here now,” the man is told before the beating.

The video reveals Raz’s gang telling the man, “For your own safety, you need to go,” and “You might need a little love tap” before seeming to assault him.

The vandal is then ordered to hand over his phone as tribute to Raz, under the threat of more violence. “You just broke my glasses! I’m blind! You just broke my glasses and stole my phone!” the man pleads, before being told, “Yeah, we should have broken your face.”

“Don’t be making no threats … I’ll blow your brains out,” Raz says.

In other sections of CHAZ, there are tents with supplies for volunteer medics as well as food donated by local restaurants, along with fruit, snacks and water bottles.

“The scene here is peaceful as hell,” said a demonstrator who identified herself as Jahtia B.

“This is our city. I was born and raised in this city. Let’s give it to the people, the people who live in Seattle and have been thriving here,” she told AFP news agency.

Seattle City Councillor Kshama Sawant disputed accounts of violence or intimidation by protesters within the area and said it was more like a street fair with political discussions and a drum circle.

CHAZ occupiers

“The right wing has been spreading rumours that there is some sort of lawlessness and crime taking place at the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone, but it is exactly the opposite of that,” said Sawant, 

An African American demonstrator, Rich Brown, told reporters he was scared Sunday when police used tear gas and flash-bangs in an attempt to clear the area.

“Today I feel supported, welcomed,” he said.

“We’re able to speak, it’s what we’ve been wanting to do this whole time, without intimidation, without fear.”

U.S President Donald Trump and Seattle’s Mayor Jenny Durkan are currently engaged in a war of words over the Zone.

“Take back your city NOW. If you don’t do it, I will,” Trump warned Durkan and Washington state governor Jay Inslee – both Democrats – in a tweet late on Wednesday, calling the protesters “domestic terrorists” who have taken over Seattle.

“This is not a game. These ugly Anarchists must be stooped (sic) IMMEDIATELY. MOVE FAST,” he said in another tweet.

Durkan replied, telling Trump to “go back to his bunker” a reference to when Trump sheltered in the White House bunker after D.C protests and riots got too close.

Inslee tweeted: “A man who is totally incapable of governing should stay out of Washington state’s business. ‘Stoop’ tweeting.”

CHAZ

In a Thursday press conference, Durkan said it would be unconstitutional and “illegal” for Trump to send military forces there to clear protesters occupying part of the city.

But, at the same news conference, Seattle Police Chief Carmen Best said the protesters could not remain camped behind barricades in the city’s Capitol Hill neighbourhood.

“You should know, leaving the precinct was not my decision,” Best said in a video addressed to the members of the department. 

Assistant Police Chief Deanna Nollette told reporters police had received reports that protesters allegedly set up barricades, “with some armed individuals running them as checkpoints into the neighborhood.

“While they have a constitutionally-protected right to bear arms, and while Washington is an open carry state, there is no legal right for those arms to be used to intimidate community members. No one at these checkpoints has the legal authority to demand identification from anyone,” Nollette said.

Nollette also said police have “heard anecdotally” of residents and businesses being asked to pay a fee if they want to operate in the area.

“This is the crime of extortion,” Nollette said.

Officials say there is no indication the occupied area is being coordinated by left-wing groups under the umbrella of Antifa.

The U.S. has been wracked with violent riots since the death almost three weeks ago of George Floyd, a black man who was murdered by a white Minneapolis police officer.

Dave Naylor is the News Editor of the Western Standard
dnaylor@westernstandardonline.com
Twitter.com/nobby7694

Continue Reading

Features

Wexit Saskatchewan ramps up for its first election

With a fall election around the corner, the new Wexit Saskatchewan Party is preparing for its first big fight.

mm

Published

on

The new Wexit Saskatchewan party is quickly preparing for its first election coming up this October. The party’s interim leader, Jake Wall says he is excited as prospective candidates for the permanent job step forward and they gear up for their first ever convention.

“I’m getting calls from people saying, ‘Listen, I want to help buy some memberships. What can I do? So the numbers are starting to pick up.”

If Wexit Saskatchewan has grown quickly, it’s because the party had little choice. On January 23, the Saskatchewan Party and NDP both agreed to change the requirements for new political parties to be established. It meant that Wexit had to collect 2,500 signatures by March 26 – much sooner than the fall deadline the party expected.

As it was, Wexit handed in 3,599 signatures on March 10, becoming just the seventh registered party in Saskatchewan.

Harry Frank estimates that he collected 500 of those signatures in 70 hours of work, canvassing Regina, Moose Jaw, Pilot Butte, and Balgonie.

“The response was overwhelming,” Frank said. “Trudeau got in again and you saw what happened. Things just exploded.”

Frank said the decision of establishment parties to make it more difficult for Wexit to gain status only made people even more eager to add their name.

“Our party is young but it’s growing,” Wall says. “We will definitely be a force in October come the election date. I know the Sask Party is worried about us.”

Wall says Wexit is picking up disillusioned voters from across the political spectrum.

“We’re getting people who are disgusted with the NDP because they have gone so far left – probably 20 per cent of people who contact us. Those who had leaned towards Sask Party but don’t like [Premier] Moe would comprise of about 50 or 60 per cent. And then others who have never voted before would be the last 20 per cent of those people.”

Wall says Moe has lost support because of high debt levels, the expenses of putting transgender bathrooms in schools, and the shut down of the provincial bus company. 

Another controversy arose when the emergency wards of 12 rural hospitals were shut down for weeks due to the pandemic. The premise was to make physical changes to the facilities and to train staff on protocols. Some felt the closures were made too quickly, were poorly communicated, and left people an hour from a hospital if they needed help. The Facebook group, “Citizens concerned about rural health care” was formed in response and now has 2,300 members.

Wall says Moe and his Saskatchewan Party refused to let the people vote on whether they supported Saskatchewan independence, and were clearly warned that if they refused, Wexit supporters would form a party.

“Why do you think Moe doesn’t want to have the plebiscite? He doesn’t want to hear the answer. If the answer comes back, 75 to 80 per cent of people want to have a [binding independence] referendum – he doesn’t want to hear that answer.”

“But we know and you know and so does everybody that reads this article, Ottawa will never respond to those demands, because if they did they’d be foolish. When you own the keys and get the gas given to you, you don’t give away the car.”

Wexit has sent out candidate application forms as people step forward to become candidates. Harry Frank wants to be one, as does Constance Maffenbeier, a former RCMP officer who ranches between Humboldt and Watrous.

“We’re just being so treated unfair[ly] you know. We’re just like the ugly stepsister,” Maffenbeier says of how Ottawa treats the West. 

“Even if we do have a different federal party in there, they’re never going to give the West the representation that they deserve. So this is one way that maybe we can wake the East up as to how exactly how important Western Canada is to confederation and Canada.”

The party will be reviewing the applications for the potential candidates and hammer out its policies in July during its inaugural convention. The party will also pick its first permanent leader to carry the its banner into the election coming a few months later. 

“I hear this all the time,” Wall says, “’You’re going to split the vote.’ Even if we did split half of the Sask Party vote, they have 51 seats. That’d mean one of us would have 26, one would have 25, the NDP would have 10. But we’ve got so many educated voters, I don’t think they’re even going to get 10.”

Wall hopes the party will run a full slate of candidates and get 30 per cent of the vote. 

“We don’t have any seats at this point. So our goal at this point is to have our voice in Regina, and maybe make Ottawa stand up and take notice. And also to show that the western separation movement is alive and well and growing.” 

Lee Harding is the Saskatchewan Affairs Columnist for the Western Standard. He is also a Research Fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy and is the former Saskatchewan Director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.

Continue Reading

Sign up for the Western Standard Newsletter

Free news and updates
* = required field

Trending

Copyright © Western Standard owned by Wildrose Media Corp.