Editor:
Paul Keyes letter (Coast Reporter, March 26) chastised the federal government for its upcoming G8 summit foreign policy initiative which focuses on maternal and child health care in third world countries, particularly Africa.
Unfortunately it has been revealed now that Ignatieff's Liberal Party were being too cute by half, in making abortion the real issue despite using cloaked wording like family planning which Ignatieff insisted to be the focus in his own motion. This was a juvenile attempt to dredge up a very divisive issue for many Canadians that was settled years ago.
Ignatieff's whipped vote of his own MPs failed so spectacularly that one of his own MPs called the event in Parliament "clown city." Many of his own MPs voted against him (Szabo, McTeague, etc.) or abstained or absented themselves. Evidently plenty of people are tired of making abortion a political football.
Prime Minister Steven Harper agreed four years ago to unequivocal access to abortion or "family planning" for Canadians, but Mr. Ignatieff seems to think we should pay for the rest of the world's "family planning" too, or at least wreak some havoc.
Contrary to Keyes' letter, Harper appears to be trying to lead the G8 nations into a more compassionate path to actively make maternal and child health care closer to the top of the agenda for the wealthier nations to act upon. This may not be perfect, but how can it be a bad thing? Let's have a reasonable debate about what Canada should or shouldn't be doing.
John Morris
Sechelt
