Today Liberals Failed WomenSteve V:
There's something I never thought I'd never hear myself write. To make matters worse, I had to hear our leader say -over and over again- "it's a 25 year policy". Point being, if we feel that strongly about it, why wasn't this causcus (sic) whipped to support our own motion which was non-binding????????????? What a slap in the face to women every where.
Not A Great Moment, Let's Just Saybigcitylib in response:
This (train wreck) sums up today's motion on maternal health from the Liberal perspective. I know, I'm being to (sic) kind.
By the way, the exploding whale is also an excellent graphic for this kind of situation.Scott Tribe:
(W)hen you have an important motion going forward in the house and you’re trying to make a point, it is not good planning or foresight to put the motion out there on the House of Commons voting schedule when you don’t have the votes or aren’t sure if you have the votes (consider that even if the 3 Liberals who had voted ‘no’ had abstained instead, we still would have lost the motion by 3 votes).More to come - at least, assuming the whole mess isn't quietly disappeared by other Lib supporters.
It may not mean much in the overall scheme of things since the government would have ignored this anyhow.. but it’s rather embarrassing optics.
Update: The above may well be all for main posts - as the only other Lib supporter post on the subject looks to completely miss the point. (Yes, "if you want a government that doesn't play politics with such issues and that will unabashedly say yes to family planning support, we all know what we need to do": vote NDP, since one national party can actually be trusted to have some principles in the area.)
But CfSR does offer up another comment worth highlighting:
How the Hell does the Liberal caucus screw up an argument that basicly (sic) comes down to the Harper Tories being more eager to defend George Bush than poor women?Again, though, the better answer looks to be that the Libs are far beyond fixing.
Really. How? And how do we fix the caucus?
HarperBizarro doesn't want to name party names (framing the problem as being with the "opposition" rather than the Libs), but this much seems beyond doubt:
This is not an Ignatieff problem. It is far broader and deeper and older than his leadership.And see also The Scott Ross:
It is time for those who cannot be 100% Liberals to go to another party. It would be preferable to face a majority Tory caucus and be able to stand for progress at all times, than to have to withstand the bullshit of yesterday.
Hours before the vote on a motion calling on the government to include "the full range of reproductive health options” in its international maternal and child health initiative, MP Lise Zarac said in response to the Conservative Party's planned opposition to it, "Once again, the government is putting its socially conservative ideology ahead of the best interests of women and girls."Update III:
However as votes were cast, and it was seen that three Liberal MPs opposed the motion as well leading to its defeat, Ms. Zarac must have realized just how social conservatives can be, as they haven't just stuck to their party, they've joined others.
Life in Moderation:
How can we, as people of the Western industrialized world (especially as Canadians), continue to claim our progressive knowledge on issues such as health care when working with people in developing nations, when even our own government is stuck in a swamp of decades past. This makes me sick to my stomach.And an unnamed Lib MP:
Shame, especially on those Liberals who either didn't show up for the vote, or abstained from voting.