It is highly likely that Saturday, November 19th, 1983, will prove to be one of the most significant dates in the history of the Pro-Life movement in Canada. Only a few days before the Directors from across Canada converged on Edmonton, we had learned that Bill C-169 had been swiftly and almost silently passed by Parliament on October 25th, and that its provisions were of vital concern to Campaign Life. Actually, it was only as Gwen Landolt, our legal counsel, was leaving for the airport, that the new provisions arrived by courier from Ottawa.
The second provision really tells the story. “Everyone who prints, publishes, distributes or posts up, or who causes to be printed, published, distributed or posted up, any document referred to in subsection (1) is, unless it bears the name and authorization required under that subsection, guilty of an offence against this Act.” As those at the meeting studied the new provision, and the enormity of the legislation in removing our basic freedoms became clear, our anger grew and so too did our resolve not to be defeated. We would not be muzzled.
It seemed to us that we had three possible options. The first one – to conform to the law and not advertise – we discarded immediately. It is essential to get our information concerning the candidates to the electorate. The second option was to
advertise and be charged with breaking the law. The third was to activate the Pro-Life Party. The third option seemed to pose too many problems of organization for us, and therefore, we zeroed in on the second choice.
It was in considering this second option, that of advertising and being charged with breaking the law, that we made the decision to incorporate Campaign Life Canada. As Campaign Life is now constituted, each Provincial President could be charged with probable fines of $1,000 to $5,000 plus court costs. However, if Campaign Life Canada were incorporated, only one charge would be laid. (The necessary legal formalities for federal incorporation are now underway.)
It was further decided to alert other single-issue groups about Bill C-169 and hope to open up the issue to the public. Each person present agreed to approach his/her M.P. and to do as much as possible to get media coverage. Immediately after the meeting, the new Campaign Life executive issued a statement to the press.
Amongst the many other items on the agenda, we discussed the coming election, the need for pro-life delegates at the National Liberal Leadership Convention, the possibilities of T.V. commercials, Joe Borowski’s Regina Court case, a new Gallup Poll, the expansion of circulation of The Interim, Provincial reports and a national policy committee, the following motions were passed.
“That any political party that has an official policy of pro-abortion be opposed by Campaign Life and that any candidate in that party not be supported.”
“It was decided that whilst Campaign Life is not prepared to oppose every member of that party, it must keep its eye on the pro-life target.”
The questions to candidates are as follows:
“Will you work to restore the full legal protection of the unborn child?”
And
“Will you work to stop providing public funds to government and non-government organizations that support or promote abortions?”
A national policy committee be struck as soon as possible.
A new slate of officers was elected and after many years of valiant service, Kathleen Toth breathed a sigh of relief as Jim Hughes accepted the office of President
President: Jim Hughes, Toronto
Past President: Kathleen Toth, Edmonton
Vice-President: Frank Wagner, South Delta, British Columbia
Secretary- Treasurer: Norah Ryan, Sudbury
The meeting which had begun at 9 a.m. was adjourned at 9 p.m. However, there was a sequel.
Sunday dawned and as we met for breakfast, or after picketing at the local hospital, many of us confessed that we had had little or no sleep, as we continued to think of the implications of Bill C-169. There were phone calls across Edmonton, and finally we had another unscheduled meeting at Edmonton Airport. Unfortunately, two members from Saskatchewan had already left on the early train, and three from Ontario had gone on an early flight. The rest of us huddled together like a bunch of conspirators in the airport and decided that maybe we had decided too quickly against running Pro-Life Party candidates. That course might prove to be the only way, because no printer wants to risk a fine or prison and if no one will print, we cannot advertise. With the Pro-Life Party, we could print and could advertise, anywhere in Canada. No final decision was made pending further advice, legal and otherwise, but it was understood that if a Pro-Life Party proved to be our only way and if we had to have a minimum of 50 candidates, there would be 50 candidates at least, and a National Pro-Life Party.
