|Action Request:||Write Letter|
Call for Letters
To MPs, Stephen Harper, & the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women Canada in support of increased core funding for women's equality-seeking groups
R.E.A.L. Women lobbying to have
Status of Women Canada disbanded
April 20, 2006
Apparently, REAL Women is engaging in a letter campaign to the federal government to have the Status of Women Canada (SWC) disbanded. Hence letters supporting SWC to the government from feminist groups are needed at this point. (If you are unfamiliar with REAL Women check out their website at: http://www.realwomenca.com)
Below is a copy of an article from the REAL Women website that provides some ideas for where they are going with the new government. We've highlighted one section that you should look at if you don't have time, or the stomach to read the whole sorry thing.
Also below, appears a copy of a National Post column that is no doubt the start of the right wing press to support their agenda.
This would be a good time to write your MP, Stephen Harper, and to the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women Canada in support of increased core funding for women's equality-seeking groups!
Let's not let them do to women in the whole country what they've done to us in Ontario!
Find your local MP's contact info at this link:
Stephen Harper, Prime Minister
Office of the Prime Minister
80 Wellington Street
Ottawa K1A 0A2
Bev Oda, Minister Responsible for the Status of Women Canada
House of Commons
Sample Letter (coming soon) Added April 25, 2006
Alert: Write to Prime Minister Harper re Women's Equality-Seeking Groups
From the REAL Women website
ELECTION 2006 AND ITS AFTERMATH
The federal election was quite a journey. When it began, on November 29, 2005, the Liberals were in the lead by 8 points. The Liberals were confident, even smug, believing that the Conservatives would stumble and self-destruct during the election campaign. The Liberals predicted all would go well for them, as Canada's natural ruling party which would win yet another (their fifth) straight election. Most agreed with this analysis by Liberal officials. In effect, the Liberal plan was to campaign on the same strategy as they had used in the June 2004 election just 18 months previously. Not a good idea.
REAL Women was one of the few organizations in Canada which predicted last spring that there would be a Liberal defeat in 2006. We were well aware that the political situation had changed dramatically between the 2004 and 2006 elections. We predicted, in fact, a Liberal defeat in 2006 in a press release dated last June 29, 2005. In that press release, we stated:
REAL Women predicts that the Martin Liberals will meet defeat within the year during the next federal election as history repeats itself:
- Liberal arrogance in 1957 over the pipeline led to Liberal defeat
- Liberal arrogance and intensive pork barreling in 1983 led to Liberal defeat
- Liberal arrogance over Bill C-38 and its imposing of the Bill which is unacceptable to the majority of
Canadians, and by compelling the Cabinet and pressuring the Liberal backbenchers to vote for the Bill, plus the Liberals' overt corruption, will lead to its defeat in the early 2006 federal election.
The Liberal government has outlived its usefulness. It will not recover from Bill C-38. Corruption, imposing on Canadians third world politics by way of arrogant top-down government, open bribery to obtain votes, and the manipulation of the Parliamentary process will bring down this despotic Prime Minister and his cronies.
The Liberal government will linger on for a few more months, but its time has run out.
Wait and see.
The many missteps by the Liberals during the campaign, plus the RCMP investigation of possible wrong doing in the Finance Department confirmed one very critical fact - namely that Canadians understood during May and June 2005, when the non-confidence votes and the vote on same-sex marriage were taking place, that there were no moral or ethical considerations that would stop the Liberals in their efforts to hold onto power - power to be held for the benefit of the party and its elites. To pursue this power, the Liberals used every trick, misrepresentation, bribery and other devices at their disposal.
The public knew then that the Liberals genuinely believed that they were entitled to govern as a right. All the bumps in the Liberal road that occurred since then, were not the defining moments but rather, the moments to confirm what Canadians knew about the Liberals and their leader Mr. Martin. In contrast, at the time of the June 2004 election, Mr. Martin had been Prime Minister for only six months. Few at that time had an understanding of Mr. Martin or his policies. By January 2006, they did, and they did not like what they saw. They saw a political leader who would do whatever it took to stay in power. The preservation of power was all that mattered to him.
Liberal MP Belinda Stronach
What is so interesting in retrospect is that the crossing of the floor by MP Belinda Stronach (Newmarket - Aurora ) last May from the Conservative to the Liberal party, which saved the Liberals from defeat in a non-confidence vote at that time, was ironically a decision which saved the Conservative party and led it to its victory in the 2006 election. That is, if the non-confidence vote had been successful in May, the Conservatives would not at that time, have developed their extensive platform which did so much to dispel the alleged "scary" perception of Mr. Harper and the Conservatives. Without this platform on which to campaign in May, Mr. Harper would have been restricted to campaigning only on the issue of Liberal corruption - not enough to turn the voters away from the Liberals, and to demand the change in government that finally occurred in this January's election.
The Road Ahead
The Conservative win of 124 seats means that Canadians will not have to struggle with the projected Liberal policies such as the decriminalization of both prostitution and marijuana and the easing of legal access to the non-medical use of drugs. A Conservative government will also not bring in a euthanasia bill, planned by former Minister of Justice, Irwin Cotler. We must be watchful, however, for anti-life and anti-family private members bills that may gain support from a united opposition of Bloc (51 seats), NDP (29 seats), and Liberals (103 seats).
Another advantage of the Conservative Party win is that the Canadian presence at the UN will change. No longer will Canada work with its former ally, the rabidly anti-Christian left-wing European Union. Instead, hopefully, Canada will, for the most part, be supporting the US government's pro-life / family positions at the UN. Also the Canadian Ambassador to the UN, Allan Rock, will soon be recalled and replaced by an individual more amenable to Conservative policies.
A Conservative government will also begin the difficult work of dismantling the Liberal infrastructure that has served the Liberals so well over the years in perpetuating its left wing policies. These include the funding of feminist only and homosexual organizations, multicultural organizations, and the Court Challenges Programme. The Status of Women and the Law Commission must also be dissolved. The Conservatives must also devise a transparent and honourable method of choosing judges for the courts - there is already one vacancy on the Supreme Court that must be filled immediately.
The road ahead for change will not be easy for the Conservatives. They will have to move very slowly so as not to alarm the electorate. They will also be harangued by the propaganda of the hostile mainstream media.
Further, Mr. Harper spoke the absolute truth on January 18, 2006 when he stated that his government would have to deal with a Liberal-dominated Senate, a liberal judiciary and the civil service.
The 105-seat Senate has 67 Liberals and only 23 Tories - the remaining senators are either Independent or old-time Progressive Conservatives who never approved of the merging of the Alliance Party with the former Conservative Party. The senators are patronage appointments who owe their position for their hard work for their respective parties. Unfortunately, they see their job in the Senate not as being a quiet reflective voice of sober thought, but rather as cheerleaders for their party. Conservative legislation passing through these raucous Liberal senators will not be easy.
Similarly, many in the civil service will not be willing to be neutral despite their claims to the contrary. This is especially true in regard to the Departments of Justice and Foreign Affairs, where feminist/lesbian/homosexuals have dominated the policy decision-making positions for several years. Many of these latter see their role in government as promoting the "progressive" agenda of the left in government policy. They will not quietly depart, but will remain on, if at all possible, to fight any changes in a conservative direction. We can expect their attempting to undermine the Conservatives by such actions, for example, as arranging significant leaks to the media, which will be ready and willing to raise controversy over any changes in the left agenda.
Finally, the Liberal appointed judges will be ready with pens poised to block any affront to their personal philosophies and ideologies by a conservative government. They have no problem, as evidenced by some of the articles in this issue of Reality, in making up so-called "constitutional" reasons to block legislation not to their liking.
Despite these real problems, however, the Conservatives will have to show they can govern and govern well. It will not be easy having regard to the triple obstacles mentioned above. However, the entrenched liberalism in the government and our courts must be shown up for what it is - sheer opportunism and manipulation to promote an agenda for self-serving reasons, not for the benefit of the public.
In this regard, one of the first obligations of the Conservative government will be to reform Parliament so as to return to us once again a truly democratic government - not one controlled by a handful of paid advisors in the Prime Minister's Office.
Although the Conservative Party is forming a minority government, its election marks the beginning of renewal for Canada. The government must judicially and reasonably carry out its responsibilities. If so, a conservative government will be in power for many years to come.
Please let the new Prime Minister know that Canadians want a pro-life/ family Ambassador appointed to the UN. It will mean a great deal to Canadians as well as to the world internationally, if he does so.
Please write to:
The Right. Hon. Stephen J. Harper
Prime Minister of Canada
80 Wellington Street
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A2
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Department of Foreign Affairs
Lester B. Pearson Building, Tower "A", 10th Floor
125 Sussex Drive
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0G2
House of Commons
National Post Thu 06 Apr 2006 Issues & Ideas A22
Feminist activism -- paid for by you and me
It didn't exactly offer the drama of, say, the Persons Case. When Status of Women Canada sent a delegation to last month's 50th UN session on (naturally) the Status of Women, it came armed with a report on the work it does does on behalf of Canadian females. "Canada's national women's machinery has conducted regional, national and online consultations, focusing on accountability issues, including gender equality indicators," read the delegation's statement. Hardly stirring stuff.
But fighting for women's rights using polls and paperwork seems to be what the federal government agency -- with its annual $23-million budget -- is all about these days.
In 1973, the Royal Commission for the Status of Women recommended that women's groups with a feminist outlook receive federal funding to help women achieve equality. Status of Women Canada is the result. But with millions of dollars being spent on these groups every year, Canadians might well wonder what these organizations have achieved.
We've all heard that working women earn only about 76 cents for every dollar their male co-workers take home (a statistic that neatly ignores career transience). But when it comes to fighting for equality, women's groups seem focused on less direct concerns. "The biggest driving issue, as well as accomplishment for us in the past couple of years has been on the issue of child care," says Paulette Senior, CEO of the YWCA, referring to the national day-care program passed by the Liberal government last year.
Unfortunately for the YWCA, which received $153,453 in federal funding in 2003-2004, Canadians recently elected a new government, in large part on a promise to dismantle the proposed national child-care arrangement.
Canadians voted this way despite the $60-million in federal funding that went to pro-feminist groups between 1997 and 2003. That figure comes courtesy of access to information documents obtained by Real Women of Canada, the Ottawa-based group that bills itself as the voice of the "alternative" women's movement.
Gwen Landolt, Real Women's vice-president, believes that while some federally funded women's groups work on issues of domestic violence and equal treatment of women, their purpose is superfluous. Many others, she says, are pursuing a different agenda altogether. After all, demanding low-cost housing specifically for women won't make them any more equal to men.
"They're acting as agents of change to promote their radical feminist agenda," says Landolt. "Their theory is that women are oppressed by the patriarchy."
She insists these groups lack any real grassroots support, but rather are front organizations for governments and unions. Landolt's group, by contrast, was delisted from federal funding in 1996 because officials did not qualify it as an equality-seeking group. Today, Real Women claims 55,000 members.
In a country where abortion is legal, divorce laws are liberalized and the majority of university graduates -- and four of the nine Supreme Court judges -- are women, feminist groups have been forced to find unique reasons for sticking around.
Kathy Marshall is executive director of Womenspace, a group dedicated to empowering women through the use of the Internet. Womenspace received $441,800 in federal cash in 2003-2004, and claims to have 2,000 people on its mailing list. Its most recent success? According to Marshall, it was ensuring that the "language of women's equality rights" was included in something called the "World Summit on the Information Society Declaration."
The Ottawa-based National Association of Women and the Law is using its $474,879 in funding not only to oppose the
implementation of misogynist sharia law in Canada, but to fight for "transgendered rights" in the workplace and society.
Meanwhile, visit the Web site of the federally funded National Action Committee on the Status of Women, which calls itself Canada's largest feminist group, and the most recent press release you'll find is one congratulating "the pan-Canadian women's movement" for (apparently) influencing the outcome of the 2004 election. In their June 30, 2004, announcement, NAC directs the victorious Liberals to continue "promoting equality through redistribution policies ... and a new system of proportional representation."
Of course, there's nothing wrong with feminist groups running out of equality issues shifting their focus to campaigning for higher taxes. But since that's essentially the platform of the federal NDP, exactly why are taxpayers funding them to do it? In an age when Canadian women are independent, it seems that Canada's women's groups are more helpless and dependent than ever.