Hiding abortion information was done for political reasons

The Ontario government argued (at length) that they had safety and security concerns regarding my requests for abortion data.

If safety and security was a concern, then why didn't they ever tell me that way before our court date? Because they couldn't defend their specious argument.

Back when I was originally denied my FOI request, I sent multiple letters to Deb Matthews and Kathleen Wynne, asking them to give me a reason why they had enacted this law. After repeatedly sending follow emails to both of them; after repeated phone calls to their offices; after meeting with m MPP Madeleine Meilleur who told me to contact the Minister of Health Deb Matthews--I received no answers.

(Wynne always referred me back to Deb Matthews refusing to be accountable herself.)

Meilleur did tell me when I met her that the change was enacted for "privacy" reasons. Which makes no sense because I never asked for, nor did I ever get, any private information.

Minister Deb Matthews did tell me though that "These amendments were debated and passed in the Legislature." Which is untrue. The abortion exclusion clause was never debated in the legislature, nor in committee hearings. Never debated at all. And notice Matthews never mention the so-called safety and security argument in her letter to me. Why not? Because the government hadn't dreamt up that argument yet at that point.

Fast forward to my bringing a charter challenge against the government, and all of a sudden safety and security is the main basis for their defense of their change to FIPPA. You know I wasn't born on a turnip truck.

In any case, do they really expect us to believe that safety and security could possibly be an issue when I never asked for any personal information of anyone, but was only asking for three aggregate numbers:

• Total of Abortions done in hospitals
• Total of Abortions done in clinics
• Total of Abortions done in physician's offices

I never asked for hospital names. I never asked for patient names. I never asked or clinic names. I never asked for the location of any of these abortion places. So there was no privacy concerns. There was no safety concerns. There was no security concerns.

Ottawa-Vanier - send a message to Patrick Brown

We social conservatives are a naive bunch.

First there was Stephen Harper. We thought he was pro-life. So we voted for him. Then he became leader of the party and he did nothing. And we said, well wait until he gets elected as prime minister. And he did with a minority government and he did nothing. And we said, well wait until he gets a majority. Then he got a second larger minority government and he did nothing. Then we said, well let's wait until he gets a majority. And he did. And he did nothing.

Suckers.

Next we had Patrick Brown who we thought was a social conservative. So we voted for him. He was against the sex education curriculum and abortion. Then he got elected. And now he's "changed his mind".

Suckers.

Notice the pattern here? Politicians who get elected because they court social conservatives, and we vote for them. Then once they get elected they turn their backs on us. I guess they think we are really stupid and that well, "hey if they don't vote for me who else will they vote for, the Liberals haha?" So we don't know what to do and we vote for them.

Suckers.

Well not this time.

In Ottawa Vanier we will be voting for a new MPP after Madeleine Meilleur decided to leave. I was going to vote for Andre Marin. In fact I have his sign in front of my house. After all, who else could I vote for--the Liberal candidate and get another Madeleine Meilleur who had no idea why her government decided to hide abortion information and probably still doesn't? I don't think so.

So I decided to vote for Elizabeth de Viel Castel, an actual social conservative who is against Kathleen Wynne's sex ed curriculum and abortion.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Let's not get fooled again.

Liberal's "values" aren't Ontario's values

Ontario is having an election. Who should we vote for?

The Liberals have squandered our money for political gain (you know the sordid story I don't have to repeat it here).

Then they began the process of dismantling our access to information rights with their abortion exclusion clause. What's next, we don't know, but it will be something because we can't trust them. Then Dalton McGuinty jumped ship before the poop hit the fan and covered him with sewage.

Andrea Horwath supported the despicable Liberals until their use to the NDP soured and Ms. Horwath decided curdled milk wasn't her style anymore.

The Conservatives were soundly snoring when the Liberals snuck the abortion exclusion clause into FIPPA, and are still asleep and refusing to admit they never saw it coming or even that it came.

We know the Liberals haven't a clue about much, and I couldn't trust them as far as I could throw them. The NDP are lefty personified although the Liberals give them a good run for their money--or should I say our money. And the Conservatives refuse to acknowledge the abortion exclusion clause hoping I'll just go away I guess (wait until they see how I pester them if they win they ain't seen nothing yet).

So who the heck are we supposed to vote for?

I agonized over this for some time now. I have come to only one conclusion. I have to vote Conservative. No person in Ontario should vote Liberal.

The clincher for me was when Madeleine's re-election brochure came in my mail. This is what it said:

"The Liberal Party of Ontario has a strong program to promote economic recovery and ensure social progress in our province while at the some time keeping the focus on balancing our budget. I am proud to be part of Kathleen Wynne's team. She has guided our government with values that are shared by Ontarians. I know that under her leadership we can meet the challenges of the future. (emphasis mine)."

I. Am. Not. Kidding.

The Ontario Liberals and Conservatives hidden agenda

I'm pretty sure there is a hidden agenda in the Ontario provincial election. And it is shared by leaders Kathleen Wynne and Tim Hudak.

This is what it says:

"Whatever happens, do not talk about the hiding of abortion statistics done by the Liberal government. No matter how much people pester you, under no circumstances should you answer the question. Got that? If you do talk about it, it I'll be forced to issue a Justin Trudeau manifesto that henceforth all candidates must be pro-choice. Okay? Do you understand?"

My riding in Ottawa Vanier is held by Liberal Madeleine Meilleur. Who I met with and asked why her government decided to do this. Of course she pretty much had no idea, and acted like a deer in the head lights when I brought it up. She solved the problem of not having a clue what I was talking about, by passing the buck to Deb-has-all-the answers-Matthews. Who funnily enough couldn't give me any answers. At least not that she'd share with me.

So I recently sent Ms. Meilleur another email, which of course she hasn't answered. Here is part of that email.

Hello Madeleine, 

"...can you please tell me what you will do if re-elected, about this decision to exclude abortion statistics from access to information requests? Will you actively work to restore our access to information rights in Ontario? Will you ensure that all medical services including abortion, will be open to public scrutiny? Will you work to drop this clause from FIPPA?"

I should have signed it, "the broken record".

Next I sent and email to the Conservative candidate Martin Forget, which said in part:

Hello Martin,

"...can you please tell me what you will do about this Liberal decision to exclude abortion statistics from access to information requests? Will you actively work to restore our access to information rights in Ontario? Will you ensure that all medical services including abortion, will be open to public scrutiny? Will you work to drop this clause from FIPPA?"

Of course, just because candidates won't answer these questions, doesn't mean we should stop asking them.

Action item for Ontario election

Since we are having an election, will you do me a favour? Will you ask your provincial candidate about the abortion exclusion clause?

Anyone who follows this blog, knows that the Liberals have been hiding Ontario's abortion statistics since 2012.

Here's a reminder, in case you forgot:

Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act See section 65.(5.7) “This Act does not apply to records relating to the provision of abortion services.” 

Bill 122: Broader Public Sector Accountability Act, 2010 See Part VIII, section 24 (17) which amends FIPPA by adding subsection (5.7) to section 65. 

This amendment to FIPPA was not debated in the Ontario legislature, was not considered at committee hearings, and was passed into law without any input whatsoever from the public, and without any public comments by a single member of the Ontario legislature. The amendment goes against the spirit of Bill 122, which was supposed to increase accountability, not reduce it.

You will also know that Kathleen Wynne and her Health Minister Deb Matthews have both refused to give me the reasons why they are hiding abortion statistics. So we have to assume it's for ideological reasons.

Kathleen Wynne even had the audacity to launch an Open and Transparent Government initiative, at the same time she was refusing to answer my questions. How's that for irony?

My own MPP Madeleine Meilleur also can't tell me the reasons for the exclusion clause, and hasn't helped me get any answers either. She told me that Minister Deb Matthews has all the answer to my questions. Yet Ms. Matthews has been spectacularly useless in giving me any answers. Ms. Meilleur also thinks that the hospitals and doctors wanted the abortion exclusion clause, when there's absolutely no evidence of this at the public hearings held,

There is no question that the Liberals have got to go.

Yet, I've also tried unsuccessfully to get Conservative leader Tim Hudak to respond to my questions about why his opposition party did nothing to stop this from happening. He, and every member of his caucus, have also stayed mute on the subject. Even after I have emailed them numerous times.

So...I am hoping that every democracy loving person in Ontario will take a minute and ask the candidates in their riding a couple of questions. Because as I've noted before, this is not a pro-life vs pro-choice issue.

I'd like you to ask them if they would work to restore our access to information rights in Ontario? If they will work to ensure, that all medical services including abortion, will be open to public scrutiny?

Because if a government in power can--for purely ideological reasons--hide information on this medical service that we know costs us at least $30-50 million a year, what other services could a government hide in the future?

Something to think about.

I can guarantee you that the candidates won't be making this an election issue. It's up to us to make it one.

Secret abortion information = open transparent government

Kathleen' Wynne's understanding of open and transparent government:

"We must also unlock public data so that you can help us solve problems and find new ways of doing things. I believe that government data belongs to the people of Ontario and so we will make government data open by default, limiting access only to safeguard privacy, security and confidentiality.
...
Our Open Government initiative will help create the transparent, accessible government that the people of Ontario deserve. Over the months and years to come, we’ll be bringing forward additional initiatives that will improve transparency, accountability, and connectivity." 

Feb 8, 2014 Part 12

Feb 5, 2014 Part 11

Jan 30, 2014 Part 10

Jan 3, 2014 Part 9

Dec 19, 2013 Part 8

Dec 12, 2013 Part 7

October 27, 2013 Part  6
October 21, 2013 Part 5
October 17, 2013 Part 4

Oct 17, 2013 Part 3

Sept 29, 2013 Part 2 

Sept 5, 2013 Part 1

The abortion exclusion clause - no transparency here

Nobody asked for the abortion exclusion clause to be inserted into Bill 122 (the Broader Sector Accountability Act and the Freedom of Information and Privacy Act (FIPPA).

Not a single person. Not a single organization. Nobody.

So how did the exclusion clause end up in the Bill?

There were no hospitals advising for the exclusion clause. There were no physicians advising for the exclusion clause. There was no public at large advising for the exclusion clause.

There was one person though, who advised the government against putting in the exclusion clause.

Through a Freedom of Information request, I learned that Cybele Sack, a patient care advocate, advised the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care to not include the abortion exclusion clause. Ms. Sack made her submission on November 23, 2010:

"Current provisions in Bill 122 which should be reconsidered given the patient safety context:- Not applying it to boards of health, health professionals' personal practice, abortion services..."

If doctors and physicians had advised the government to put the clause in (as my MPP Madeleine Meilleur indicated to me), I would have seen those recommendation in the FOI. 

No other stakeholder made any reference to the clause. Their presentations are here and here. The word "abortion" doesn't appear anywhere in these consultations.

In any event, the clause was already in the Bill before public consultations took place. If someone had asked the government to put the clause in, I would see that in what I received. I didn't. 

Did the Minister put the clause in herself for ideological reasons?

I've given Minister Deb Matthews ample opportunity to explain the source of the clause. But she can't, or won't, or doesn't want to.

The only logical explanation is that--contrary to my MPP's statements that the Ministry doesn't put in clauses for their own sake, but rather that it is only done after public consultations--the Ministry or Minister put this clause into the Bill.

Here is the narrative of what Ms. Meilleur told me when I met her in her office:

I asked her why the exclusion clause was included in the Bill. She said that it came into affect:

"to assist hospitals, at the request of the hospitals, to maintain the quality and the privacy of the information. So it was not specific to abortion, it was among other things...I don't think you'd like your private information to be disclosed to the public." 

When I pressed her further she said:

"at the request of the hospital, at the request of the physician, this was supported...the objective of this government and past governments have put in place the Freedom of Information Act, so it was to protect certain information, and this was added because of concerns the physicians had and the concern the hospitals had, so that's why it's in place." 

I then asked her to confirm that the hospitals and physicians has asked to have this exclusion clause. Her response was: 

"When we do amendments it's not because the government that decides there is an amendment, it's at the request of others and it's discussed and its put forward after wide consultations with those concerned". 

As I continued to press her on this, she responded: 

"You know what, it's not my Ministry so I don't know all the details, so I think that these questions should be put to the Ministry of Health to see how it came about. You will get the information." 

She said it was: 

"the hospitals, the physicians and the public at large...the Minister can give you the specifics...the Minister has all the answers...your questions are very detailed...send her a letter and cc me so when she replies I will receive your response...the Ministry has all the expertise and all the answers..."

It may be the case that the Minister has all the answers. But she won't share them with me. After sending her many emails and calling her office many times, I still don't have any of the answers, never mind "all the answers". 

The only feasible answer is that the Minister herself is responsible for the clause. A clause that does away with our access to information rights.

If I'm wrong, she should let me know.

Why we do what we do

I am continually surprised at the lack of publicly pro-life politicians in this country. Federally there are some, and they are very brave indeed. This posting is not about them. It's about the rest.

In Ontario, I can't even think of one publicly pro-life politician. Maybe there is one. I just wish he or she would make themselves known.

Why is that? Is it because they're scared of being demonized by the pro-abortions? Is is because they are cowards? Is it because they just don't care? Or is it all of the above?

Abortion--it's discussion in any kind of public way; the increasing lack of availability of obtaining accurate abortion statistics; the inability to get a politician to answer questions on the subject; what is all that?

The subject is going underground. It is verboten.

We used to be able to depend on Statistics Canada to provide us with accurate data. But when the quality of those statistics started deteriorating because of non-disclosure by the provinces, Statistics Canada didn't want their name attached to such inaccurate numbers. Now CIHI's numbers are inaccurate and under reported. It isn't very helpful to have numbers that paint only a partial picture of what is going on in Canada with abortion. Accurate statistics should be legislated. Why aren't they?

Federal Access to Information requests increasingly yield "cabinet confidences" and "solicitor-client privilege" excuses at an alarming rate. And information commissioners are toothless to to anything.

Ontario freedom of information requests aren't even allowed anymore. The Ontario Conservatives--who one would hope would keep the Liberals in check--did nothing to stop this from happening. These Conservatives seem to have a don't-talk-about-abortion-ever policy. They're whipped by the Government in power--a mean feat if there ever was one.

All the while children continue to be killed

Those of us who are marginalized because of our pro-life views keep on doing what we can to change the tide. It sometimes feels like we will never make any headway.

Looking over the past year though, I notice a common hopeful thread in all the people who I know who are pro-life. They are committed to the plight of the unborn. Really committed. They are driven. They don't give up and they don't give in. They speak up. Continually. They educate women. They support women in crisis pregnancies. They pray in front of abortion clinics. They write letters to the editor and op-eds for newspapers. They push for legal protection and advise politicians who will listen. They legally challenge the government, sometimes for no pay.

They do what they can, and they never stop doing it. They do it for the children. They inspire me to keep going. They are my super-heroes.

Happy New Year and God bless every one of us.

A day in the life of a pro-life blogger

Meet your MPP and ask why abortions services are excluded from FIPPA

I met with my MPP Madeleine Meilleur this week, about the recent changes to FIPPA to exclude abortion services. I had already written to her.

(In this meeting, Ms. Meilleur seemed somewhat confused as to what this change to FIPPA actually was. She did state at the end of our conversation that this is not her portfolio [Health]. Understood. But this is her own government's changes to the law. She also didn't know what CIHI was. Again a surprise, especially since the change to the law, and CIHI were both mentioned in her response to my original letter to her.)

I asked her why the government put the abortion exclusion clause into FIPPA.

Ms. Meilleur responded:

"We amended the Freedom of Information Act at the request of the hospitals to maintain the quality and the privacy of the information, so it was not specific to abortion. It's among other things [in the act]. I don't think you would like your private information to be disclosed to the public." 

I explained to Ms. Meilleur, that the change had nothing to do with privacy. That I agree that private information should never be released, however there is no private information in what I'm asking for. I'm asking for totals of abortion statistics, those done in hospitals, in private physician offices and clinics. I said that private and personal information is already excluded from the act. I said that because it is important to have good statistics, and it doesn't matter if you are pro-life or pro-choice, we need to have accurate statistics for all health concerns for women.

I asked her again, saying that I'm just trying to understand why the Ontario government did this. They haven't excluded information for woman who have breast cancer, or knee surgeries. So why did they exclude abortion services?

Ms.Meilleur responded:

"The answer is that at the request of the hospitals, at the request of the physician, this was supported. I know your objective but the objective of this government, and of past governments, who have put in place the Freedom of Information and Privacy Act, so it was added to protect certain information, so this was added, because of concerns the hospitals have, so that's why it's in place."

Again she brought the discussion back to privacy, which is clearly not what this is about. In any event, instead I asked her:

"So are you saying that the hospitals and physicians asked to have this excluded?"

Ms. Meilleur responded:

"When they do an amendment it's not because the government wants an amendment, it's at the request of others and its discussed, and put forward after wide consultation."

When I asked her to expand on that she said:

"Well you know what, I don't know all the details. So I think these questions should be put to the Ministry of Health, as to how it's come about."

So did the government consult the hospitals and doctors on this abortion exclusion clause? First I've heard of this.

She added that consultations were done with the public at large. Again a surprise to me. She said that usually that's the way it's done, the way that amendments are brought about. She said I should ask the Minister and that the Minister would give me specific details. She said she didn't know all the details around the changes.

Then I explained CIHI and their role and asked the question: how can I use CIHI's numbers for research when they are inaccurate? She said didn't know about this organization and couldn't answer my question.

She said that the questions I had asked her in my letter, were sent to the Minister's office, so the response I received would have came from the Minister.

She finished with this:

"Send your questions to the Minister who has the expertise, they have all the answers."

That I did. Write to Ms. Deb Matthews, Minister of Health and Long Term Care. Who has all the answers. I'm dying to know what they are.

I hope others will go to their own MPPs and ask him or her about why this change to FIPPA.

Minister of Health Deb Matthews has all the answers on abortion exclusion clause

I met with my MPP this week Madeleine Meilleur (see here for what she told me).

I have now sent a letter to Minister Deb Matthews with these questions, as per Ms. Meilleur's suggestion. She told me that Deb Matthews has all the answers.

1) First of all, what rationale did the government have for excluding abortion services from FIPPA?

2) Second, since taxpayers fund abortion, in the same way they fund all medical services, why was this one service singled out for exclusion, when no other services were excluded?

Ms. Meilleur's letter of response to me regarding those two questions, stated that "the inclusion of hospitals under FIPPA is a strong indication of the Government's commitment to enhancing openness and transparency in the public sector."

She also mentioned that CIHI publishes Ontario statistics in their report and can be used for "research purposes", and that the changes "were debated in the Legislature".

So based on Ms. Meilleur's response (which didn't actually answer my questions), I added four additional questions for Ms. Matthews.

3. Can you please explain how exempting abortion services from FIPPA "enhances openness and transparency in the public sector"?

4. I agree that CIHI publishes abortion statistics for Ontario. However CIHI's statistics are grossly under reported for numerous reasons including the fact that CIHI does not base their numbers on OHIP billings; abortions done in private physician's offices are not included; and many clinics do not report abortions performed. In fact CIHI's statistics for Ontario are understated by at least 45%.

Please see here for more accurate abortion statistics I did for 2010 based on OHIP billings:
http://run-with-life.blogspot.ca/2012/05/revised-2010-ontario-abortions-tell-sad.html

Can you explain to me how someone doing research into Ontario's abortion statistics, would use information that is inaccurate?

5. The letter states that "These amendments were debated and passed in the Legislature." Can you please provide me with the links to Hansard where the abortion exclusion clause was debated in the Legislature?

6) Ms. Meilleur stated that the changes to FIPPA were made because the hospitals and doctors requested the changes. Can you please tell me how and when these consultations took place. Were they meetings or submitted briefs?

Hiding abortion statistics - enhances openess and transparency

A while ago I wrote to my MPP about the changes to FIPPA that excluded abortion services.

Below is her response to me. Below that, is my latest letter in reply to her response.

Dear Ms. Meilleur,

Thank you for your September 20th response to my letter.

However you failed to answer my two questions.

Your letter does state that "the inclusion of hospitals under FIPPA is a strong indication of the Government's commitment to enhancing openness and transparency in the public sector."

You also mention that CIHI publishes Ontario statistics in their report and can be used for "research purposes", and that the changes "were debated" in the Legislature".

So in addition to my previous two questions I would like you to answer, I'd like to add three additional questions, based on your current letter to me.

3. Can you please explain how exempting abortion services from FIPPA "enhances openness and transparency in the public sector"?

4. I agree that CIHI publishes abortion statistics for Ontario. However CIHI's statistics are grossly under reported for numerous reasons including the fact that CIHI does not base their numbers on OHIP billings; abortions done in private physician's offices are not included; and many clinics do not report abortions performed. In fact CIHI's statistics for Ontario are understated by at least 45%.

Please see here for more accurate abortion statistics I did for 2010 based on OHIP billings.

Can you explain to me how someone doing research into Ontario's abortion statistics, would use information that is inaccurate?

5. You state that "These amendments were debated and passed in the Legislature." Can you please provide me with the links to Hansard where the abortion exclusion clause was debated in the Legislature?

I look forward to hearing back from you soon with answers to my five questions.

Sincerely,
Patricia Maloney

Trying to meet with my MPP

On August 25, I wrote to my MPP Madeleine Meilleur. I asked her about the recent FOI changes to FIPPA. I asked her two questions.

1) What rationale did the government have for excluding abortion services from FIPPA?

2) Since taxpayers fund abortion, in the same way they fund all medical services, why was this one service singled out for exclusion, when no other services were excluded?

Five days later I still had received no response. So I followed up with another email. Then I waited another six days. Still no response.

Yesterday I called her office and asked when I could expect a reply to my email. I was told that they had sent it to the Minister's office and were waiting for the Minister to respond, and that could take two to three weeks longer.

I said okay then, I'd like to meet with Ms. Meilleur. Long pause. Then the assistant said, well don't you want to wait for the Minister's response first? I said, well no, since I wrote my letter to the MPP, and not to the Minister, that I wanted to know what my MPP thought about this change. The assistant said she would get the scheduling person to call me back. Nobody called me back.

Just before noon today I called her office again, and asked to speak to the scheduling clerk. When she finally got on the line, she said I couldn't have an appointment until October. I said, that was an awful long time for a constituent to wait for an appointment to meet with their MPP. She said that Ms. Meilleur only meets with constituents on Fridays (she is at Queen's Park the rest of the week). Fine. So I asked for an appointment in October. She didn't want to give me a firm appointment date. When I insisted on one, she finally relented and gave me one on October 11. But she said the appointment was only tentative.

Remind me again. Who do our MPPs work for?

(I'll let you know how my appointment goes. Assuming it actually happens.)