Women In Need

"Women who are victims of criminal sexual violence in those countries have a right to get care and help, including a safe abortion. We find it simply unacceptable that Stephen Harper is sending out his ministers to stake out that type of ideological position instead of helping victims."
NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair

BBC News

It's a position very similar to one taken by the U.S. administration of former President Ronald Reagan. Funding to alleviate the stresses of oppression and endemic poverty for Third World women and children, but no funding to be allocated toward any group that in any measure enables abortion. It was horribly wrong then and it is no less wrong as a humanitarian, charitable position now, taken by the current Government of Canada.

"We've been clear in Muskoka, so you can think the same logic will apply here" said Canada's international development minister, Christian Paradis. This government is not prepared, will not be prepared and simply will not agree to fund projects overseas enabling the victims of war rape and child brides to obtain abortions.
 
We know that rape is being used in countries like the Democratic Republic of Congo as an instrument of war. An 8-year-old child bride in Yemen died last month of internal injuries inflicted upon her young body through the consummation of 'marriage', otherwise known as child rape, by her 'husband', a man five times her age.

Peter Muller // Associated Press
This was the highest-profile sexual-violence case ever tried in the Central African country, and it brought a landmark verdict in a nation where thousands are believed to be raped each year by soldiers and militia groups that often go unpunished.

No intervention for them required, according to the principles espoused by the men who enact our legislation and act on behalf of Canadians to offer succour and humanitarian aid to the dispossessed, the poor, women and children in developing countries. Even while Prime Minister Stephen Harper took time in his schedule to meet in New York last week to discuss maternal and child health, giving $3-billion for the purpose of improving health outcomes for mothers and children, abortion is out.

It's in, within Canada. A situation that will remain the status quo simply because to move otherwise would be to disturb the prospect of future election results. Because, as it happens, the majority of Canadians recognize it as a solution to some situations and honour the right of women to control their bodies and their futures. Surely, what is good enough, practical enough on any level, for Canadians should be available to indigent non-Canadians?

"Minister Paradis is wrong. The victims of sexual violence need the support of countries like Canada. Period", Kirsty Duncan chided the government, speaking for the Liberals as her party's international development critic. During the 2010 G8 summit in Muskoka, the Prime Minister said that none of Canada's share of health dollars directed to women and children would be used to further abortion entitlements. Time for a change.

A report to the UN Security Council from secretary-general Ban-Ki moon is expected to recommend access to abortion services for pregnancies resulting from rape during conflict. Generally speaking the UN and its many committees have a penchant for getting things wrong. This time they're on the right track, according to the Global Justice Center in New York.

And the Government of Canada, which has a fairly good track record of getting things just right, have fallen down on this file. Pity, that.