House of Commons – We Need A Law

Bill C-243 Opportunity to Support Mothers Better

WNAL Staff — Fri, 14 Apr 2017 04:53:17 +0000

Early in April, two of our staff had the honour of presenting as witnesses at the committee hearings for Bill C-243. Bill C-243 is a private member’s bill calling for a review of Canada’s national maternity benefits strategy. The Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities heard from both Alicia and Anna as mothers who care deeply about women having the opportunity and option to stay home with their children.

Speaking at these hearings allowed us not only to speak for ourselves as mothers, but also to raise issues that affect many more Canadian women. As Anna cited in her presentation, Statistics Canada reported in 2009 that 40% of new parents could not afford to take maternity leave, and, of those who did, 81% would have stayed home for longer than they did if they felt it was financially possible.

Of course, these statistics only apply to those who chose to continue their pregnancies. Anna also noted the 100,000+ babies lost to abortion each year in Canada, for whom maternity leave could never be applied. The Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada reports that finances are a main reason women choose abortion. AbortioninCanada.ca states that at least 20% of women choosing abortion cite finances as their #1 reason for doing so. This means at least 20,000 pre-born babies are sacrificed annually for primarily financial reasons. No doubt countless others look at the maternity leave options available and choose not to get pregnant in the first place.

All of this points to the pressing need to evaluate and update Canada’s maternity benefit strategy. It needs to support women both in the workforce and in the home by ensuring financial stability during and after pregnancy.

Melodie Ballard, who inspired Bill C-243, did not choose abortion, and both she and her son suffered for it. Ms. Ballard was just starting a career in welding when she became pregnant and her doctor advised her to stop working in her current position. Her employer was not able to transfer her into another position, so she ended up on sick leave very early in her pregnancy. She was not sick, but Service Canada did not know how else to classify her. On sick leave, she was unable to work without being penalized. When she later found out she could only take maternity leave 8 weeks prior to her child’s birth (this has since been increased to 15 weeks), she ended up with an income gap that led to her losing her apartment and having to move more than 10 times during her pregnancy and in the first two years of her baby’s life.

Melodie Ballard and her son (PC: Elliot Ferguson, The Whig-Standard)

This is an articulate, hard-working young woman who crashed from a full-time job to near-homelessness in the span of a year because our maternity benefits system did not know how to deal with her. This is a situation that would never, ever happen to a man. It should never happen to a woman either. We put so much talk and money into abortion access, yet we do not have proper supports in place for women who want to choose motherhood.

Much discussion was had by the committee regarding the need for maternity benefits to be adaptable for each woman’s needs. This customised approach would mean women do not slip through the cracks, as Melodie Ballard did. Alicia spoke to the committee about adding the option to apply for child benefits sooner, to prevent the two- to three-month gap that occurs when you apply after your baby’s birth. Anna spoke of the need for a health benefit plan for women who do not have access to one elsewhere. This would cover prescription costs for both mother and child to ensure the best possible care is received during and after pregnancy. Both also spoke about the cultural value of motherhood, and how a national benefits strategy can enhance or demean that value.

Ms. Ballard speaks of motherhood as her top priority. She has bravely found ways to build a life for her son that includes her, even as her poverty deepens and the stress takes a toll on her mental health. Having a child, though, should not be a choice between poverty and stability, or a choice between career and no career. Motherhood is a career choice in and of itself. We need to allow women to make that choice without stigma, and without fear of the financial repercussions.

Bill C-243 is an excellent opportunity to evaluate how we can support women who want to choose motherhood but feel unable to for financial reasons. It is a bill that every pro-life individual should wholeheartedly support, as pro-life goes beyond life in the womb. We want women to thrive in pregnancy as well as in motherhood, and support any effort to build a society that allows that.

How MPs Voted on C225

WNAL Staff — Tue, 01 Nov 2016 03:03:06 +0000

On Wednesday, October 19, Canadian MPs were asked to vote that Bill C-225 be “read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights”. Regrettably, 209 MPs that evening chose to deny justice to the family of Cassie Kaake and her pre-born daughter, Molly.

Many of you have joined the efforts of the Molly Matters campaign these past several months. Thousands of Canadians rallied together to support the families of Cassie and Molly and the private member’s bill of MP Cathay Wagantall (C-225), signatures were gathered and individuals were mobilized in a renewed effort to see whether Canadian Parliament would finally acknowledge the lives of pre-born victims of crime. Thank you for all you did to ensure the story of Cassie and Molly was heard across this country.

We persevere in our efforts, and one way we do that is by continuing the conversation that began many months ago. Below you will see an alphabetical listing of how MPs voted on C-225 and we encourage you to write a letter in response (scroll down for sample letters). Note: those who were absent or did not vote, are not listed below (52 MPs did not vote, or were absent from the house), however you are encouraged to send them an email inquiring how they would have voted.

Albrecht, Harold – Conservative – Yes
Aldag, John – Liberal – No
Alghabra, Omar – Liberal – No
Alleslev, Leona – Liberal – No
Allison, Dean – Conservative – Yes
Amos, William – Liberal – No
Anandasangaree, Gary – Liberal – No
Anderson, David – Conservative – Yes
Arnold, Mel – Conservative – Yes
Arsenault, Rene – Liberal – No
Arya, Chandra – Liberal – No
Ashton, Niki – NDP – No
Aubin, Robert – NDP – No
Ayoub, Ramez – Liberal – No
Badawey, Vance – Liberal – No
Bagnell, Larry – Liberal – No
Bains, Navdeep – Liberal – No
Barlow, John – Conservative – Yes
Barsalou-Duval, Xavier – Bloc – No
Baylis, Frank – Liberal – No
Beaulieu, Mario – Bloc – No
Beech, Terry – Liberal – No
Bennett, Carolyn – Liberal – No
Benson, Sheri – NDP – No
Bergen, Candice – Conservative – Yes
Berthold, Luc – Conservative – Yes
Bezan, James – Conservative – Yes
Bibeau, Marie-Claude – Liberal – No
Bittle, Chris – Liberal – No
Blaikie, Daniel – NDP – No
Blair, Bill – Liberal – No
Blaney, Steven – Conservative – Yes
Blaney, Rachel – NDP – No
Block, Kelly – Conservative – Yes
Boissonnault, Randy – Liberal – No
Bossio, Mike – Liberal – No
Boucher, Sylvie – Conservative – No
Boudrias, Michel – Bloc – No
Boulerice, Alexandre – NDP – No
Boutin-Sweet, Marjolaine – NDP – No
Bratina, Bob – Liberal – No
Breton, Pierre – Liberal – No
Brison, Scott – Liberal – No
Brosseau, Ruth Ellen – NDP – No
Brown, Gordon – Conservative – Yes
Caesar-Chavannes, Celina – Liberal – No
Calkins, Blaine – Conservative – Yes
Cannings, Richard – NDP – No
Caron, Guy – NDP – No
Carr, Jim – Liberal – No
Carrie, Colin – Conservative – Yes
Casey, Bill – Liberal – No
Casey, Sean – Liberal – No
Chagger, Bardish – Liberal – No
Champagne, Francois-Philippe – Liberal – No
Chan, Arnold – Liberal – No
Chen, Shaun – Liberal – No
Chong, Michael – Conservative – No
Choquette, Francois – NDP – No
Christopherson, David – NDP – No
Cooper, Michael – Conservative – Yes
Cormier, Serge – Liberal – No
Cullen, Nathan – NDP – No
Cuzner, Rodger – Liberal – No
Dabrusin, Julie – Liberal – No
DeCourcey, Matt – Liberal – No
Dhaliwal, Sukh – Liberal – No
Dhillon, Anju – Liberal – No
Di Iorio, Nicola – Liberal – No
Dion, Stephane – Liberal – No
Diotte, Kerry – Conservative – Yes
Doherty, Todd – Conservative – Yes
Donnelly, Fin – NDP – No
Dreeshan, Earl – Conservative – Yes
Drouin, Francis – Liberal – No
Dubourg, Emmanuel – Liberal – No
Duguid, Terry – Liberal – No
Duncan, Kirsty – Liberal – No
Duncan, Linda – NDP – No
Duvall, Scott – NDP – No
Eglinski, Jim – Conservative – Yes
Ehsassi, Ali – Liberal – No
El-Khoury, Faycal – Liberal – No
Ellis, Neil – Liberal – No
Eyolfson, Doug – Liberal – No
Falk, Ted – Conservative – Yes
Fast, Ed – Conservative – Yes
Fergus, Greg – Liberal – No
Fillmore, Andy – Liberal – No
Finley, Diane – Conservative – Yes
Finnigan, Pat – Liberal – No
Fisher, Darren – Liberal – No
Fonseca, Peter – Liberal – No
Foote, Judy – Liberal – No
Fortin, Rheal – Bloc – No
Fragiskatos, Peter – Liberal – No
Fraser, Colin – Liberal – No
Fraser, Sean – Liberal – No
Fry, Hedy – Liberal – No
Fuhr, Stephen – Liberal – No
Gallant, Cheryl – Conservative – Yes
Garneau, Marc – Liberal – No
Garrison, Randall – NDP – No
Genereux, Bernard – Conservative – Yes
Genuis, Garnett – Conservative – Yes
Gerretsen, Mark – Liberal – No
Gill, Marilene – Block – No
Gladu, Marilyn – Conservative – Yes
Goldsmith-Jones, Pam – Liberal – No
Goodale, Ralph – Liberal – No
Gould, Karina – Liberal – No
Gourde, Jacques – Conservative – Yes
Graham, David de Burgh – Liberal – No
Hajdu, Patty – Liberal – No
Hardcastle, Cheryl – NDP – No
Harder, Rachael – Conservative – Yes
Hardie, Ken – Liberal – No
Harvey, T.J. – Liberal – No
Hehr, Kent – Liberal – No
Hoback, Randy – Conservative – Yes
Holland, Mark – Liberal – No
Housefather, Anthony – Liberal – No
Hughes, Carol – NDP – No
Hussen, Ahmed – Liberal – No
Hutchings, Gudie – Liberal – No
Iacono, Angelo – Liberal – No
Jenerous, Matt – Conservative – Yes
Johns, Gord – NDP – No
Jolibois, Georgina – NDP – No
Jones, Yvonne – Liberal – No
Jordan, Bernadette – Liberal – No
Jowhari, Majid – Liberal – No
Julian, Peter – NDP – No
Singh Kang, Darshan – Liberal – No
Kelly, Pat – Conservative – Yes
Kent, Peter – Conservative – No
Khalid, Iqra – Liberal – No
Khera, Kamal – Liberal – No
Kitchen, Robert – Conservative – Yes
Kmiec, Tom – Conservative – Yes
Kwan, Jenny – NDP – No
Lake, Mike – Conservative – Yes
Lametti, David – Liberal – No
Lamoureux, Kevin – Liberal – No
Lapointe, Linda – Liberal – No
Lauzon, Stephane – Liberal – No
Lauzon, Guy – Conservative – Yes
Laverdiere, Helene – NDP – No
Lebel, Denis – Conservative – Yes
Lebouthillier, Diane – Liberal – No
Lefebvre, Paul – Liberal – No
Lemieux, Denis – Liberal – No
Leslie, Andrew – Liberal – No
Levitt, Michael – Liberal – No
Liepert, Ron – Conservative – Yes
Lightbound, Joel – Liberal – No
Lobb, Ben – Conservative – Yes
Lockhard, Alaina – Liberal – No
Long, Wayne – Liberal – No
Longfield, Lloyd – Liberal – No
Ludwig, Karen – Liberal – No
MacAulay, Lawrence – Liberal – No
MacGregor, Alistair – NDP – No
MacKenzie, Dave – Conservative – Yes
Maguire, Larry – Conservative – Yes
Malcolmson, Sheila – NDP – No
Maloney, James – Liberal – No
Masse, Brian – NDP – No
Masse, Remi – Liberal – No
Mathyssen, Irene – NDP – No
May, Bryan – Liberal – No
May, Elizabeth – Green – No
McCallum, John – Liberal – No
McColeman, Phil – Conservative – Yes
McCrimmon, Karen – Liberal – No
McDonald, Ken – Liberal – No
McGuinty, David – Liberal – No
McKenna, Catherine – Liberal – No
McKinnon, Ron – Liberal – No
McLeod, Cathy – Conservative – Yes
McLeod, Michael – Liberal – No
Mendes, Alexandra – Liberal – No
Mihychuk, MaryAnn – Liberal – No
Miller, Larry – Conservative – Yes
Miller, Marc – Liberal – No
Monsef, Maryam – Liberal – No
Moore, Christine – NDP – No
Morneau, Bill – Liberal – No
Morrissey, Robert – Liberal – No
Mulcair, Thomas – NDP – No
Murray, Joyce – Liberal – No
Nantel, Pierre – Liberal – No
Nassif, Eva – Liberal – No
Nater, John – Conservative – Yes
Nault, Robert – Liberal – No
Nicholson, Rob – Conservative – Yes
Nuttall, Alexaner – Conservative – Yes
O’Connell, Jennifer – Liberal – No
Oliver, John – Liberal – No
O’Regan, Seamus – Liberal – No
O’Toole, Erin – Conservative – Yes
Ouellette, Robert-Falcon – Liberal – No
Paradis, Denis – Liberal – No
Paul-Hus, Pierre – Conservative – Yes
Pauze, Monique – Bloc – No
Peterson, Kyle – Liberal – No
Petitpas Taylor, Ginette – Liberal – No
Philpott, Jane – Liberal – No
Picard, Michel – Liberal – No
Plamondon, Louis – Bloc – No
Poilievre, Pierre – Conservative – Yes
Poissant, Jean-Claude – Liberal – No
Quach, Anne Minh-Thu – NDP – No
Raitt, Lisa – Conservative – Yes
Ramsey, Tracey – NDP – No
Rankin, Murray – NDP – No
Rayes, Alain – Conservative – Yes
Reid, Scott – Conservative – Yes
Richards, Blake – Conservative – Yes
Rioux, Jean – Liberal – No
Ritz, Gerry – Conservative – Yes
Robillard, Yves – Liberal – No
Rodriguez, Pablo – Liberal – No
Romanado, Sherry – Liberal – No
Rota, Anthony – Liberal – No
Rudd, Kim – Liberal – No
Ruimy, Dan – Liberal – No
Rusnak, Don – Liberal – No
Saganash, Romeo – NDP – No
Sahota, Ruby – Liberal – No
Saini, Raj – Liberal – No
Saijan, Harjit S. – Liberal – No
Sangha, Ramesh – Liberal – No
Sansoucy, Brigitte – NDP – No
Sarai, Randeep – Liberal – No
Saroya, Bob – Conservative – Yes
Scarpaleggia, Francis – Liberal – No
Scheer, Andrew – Conservative – Yes
Schiefke, Peter – Liberal – No
Schmale, Jamie – Conservative – Yes
Schulte, Deborah – Liberal – No
Serre, Marc – Liberal – No
Sgro, Judy A. – Liberal – No
Sheehan, Terry – Liberal – No
Shields, Martin – Conservative – Yes
Shipley, Bev – Conservative – Yes
Sidhu, Jati – Liberal – No
Sidhu, Sonia – Liberal – No
Sikand, Gagan – Liberal – No
Sohi, Amarjeet – Liberal – No
Sopuck, Robert – Conservative – Yes
Sorenson, Kevin – Conservative – Yes
Spengemann, Sven – Liberal – No
Ste-Marie, Gabriel – Bloc – No
Stetski, Wayne – NDP – No
Stewart, Kennedy – NDP – No
Strahl, Mark – Conservative – Yes
Stubbs, Shannon – Conservative – Yes
Sweet, David – Conservative – Yes
Tabbara, Marwan – Liberal – No
Tan, Geng – Liberal – No
Tassi, Filomena – Liberal – No
Theriault, Luc – Bloc – No
Trost, Brad – Conservative – Yes
Trudel, Karine – NDP – No
Van Kesteren, Dave – Conservative – Yes
Van Loan, Peter – Conservative – Yes
Vandal, Dave – Liberal – No
Vandenbeld, Anita – Liberal – No
Vecchio, Karen – Conservative – Yes
Viersen, Arnold – Conservative – Yes
Virani, Arif – Liberal – No
Wagantall, Cathay – Conservative – Yes
Warawa, Mark – Conservative – Yes
Warkentin, Chris – Conservative – Yes
Waugh, Kevin – Conservative – Yes
Webber, Len – Conservative – Yes
Wilkinson, Jonathan – Liberal – No
Wilson-Raybould, Jody – Liberal – No
Wong, Alice – Conservative – Yes
Wrzesnewskyj, Borys – Liberal – No
Young, Kate – Liberal – No
Yurdiga, David – Conservative – Yes
Zahid, Salma – Liberal – No
Zimmer, Bob – Conservative – Yes

Sample Letters

Voted against Bill C-225:

Dear [MP Name],

I was very disappointed to hear that you voted against Bill C-225, also known as Cassie and Molly’s Law. This vote would have simply moved discussion of Bill C-225 to the committee stage, yet you could not find it in your heart to allow this, out of fear that the abortion debate might be re-opened.

C-225 was drafted to extend the Criminal Code protection to “wanted” pre-born children in Canada, who are now left vulnerable to all degrees of violence with no sanction in our justice system. Your “no” vote was a direct statement to pregnant women that their wanted pregnancies are of no concern to you.

Please know that I, along with the other seventy per cent of Canadians who favoured Molly’s Law, will continue to fight for a law that protects pregnant women and their pre-born children.

Sincerely,

[Name]

Voted in favour of Bill C-225:

Dear [MP Name],

Thank you for voting in favour of Bill C-225! Although the vote did not pass, I am thankful that you stood up for Cassie and Molly; indeed for all pregnant women and their pre-born children. It is encouraging that our representative in the House of Commons is willing to speak for vulnerable Canadians and to know that pregnant women and their wanted pre-born children matter to you.

Please know that I, along with the other seventy per cent of Canadians who favoured Molly’s Law, will continue to fight for a law that protects pregnant women and their pre-born children. Thank you for the work that you do!

Sincerely,

[Name]

Did not vote or was absent from the house:

Dear [MP Name},

I noticed that you did not vote on Bill C-225, or Cassie and Molly’s law. As your constituent, I am interested to know whether or not you would have supported it. C-225 was drafted to extend the Criminal Code protection to “wanted” pre-born children in Canada, who are now left vulnerable to all degrees of violence with no sanction in our justice system.

Sincerely,

[Name]