Abstracts
Abstract
In 1988, Canada’s federal Parliament faced the challenge of addressing the legal status of abortion after the Supreme Court of Canada, in R. v. Morgentaler, struck down existing restrictions. In the resulting legal void, the Progressive Conservative (PC) federal government found itself under pressure to act. Examining parliamentary debates and recently released cabinet documents from the period of January 1988 to May 1990, this paper asks how the federal government managed the abortion issue following R. v. Morgentaler, including creating and defending legislation as a policy solution. This paper identifies politicising and depoliticising procedures (i.e., legislation and motions) that framed the issue in a way that that allowed the government to take action on the abortion issue while maintaining distance as it crafted and defended legislation. This paper reconstructs the frames that presented government legislation (Bill C-43) as “balanced” and uses the theoretical concepts of politicisation and depoliticisation to show how the frames alternately pushed and pulled the government towards and away from the abortion issue. These frames worked by deferring responsibility to other levels of government and the private sphere, as well as by invoking fatalism by highlighting the intransigency of abortion, the constraints that limit government action, and the necessity of pursuing only the government’s proposed solution. Although the frames serve to justify the frame of a “balanced” solution, their inherent contradictions and tensions point to fractures within the narrative of Bill C-43 as a “balanced” solution and may help explain the legislation’s failure.
Keywords:
- abortion policy,
- R. v. Morgentaler,
- Canada,
- depoliticisation,
- framing
Résumé
En 1988, le Parlement du Canada a dû relever le défi de régler le statut juridique de l’avortement après que la Cour suprême du Canada (CSC) ait annulé les restrictions existantes dans l’affaire R. c. Morgentaler. Dans le vide juridique qui en a découlé, le gouvernement fédéral progressiste-conservateur (PC) s’est retrouvé sous pression d’agir.
En étudiant les débats parlementaires et les documents du Cabinet de janvier 1988 à mai 1990, cet article explore comment le gouvernement de l’époque a géré la question de l’avortement, notamment en créant et en défendant un projet de loi comme solution politique. Cet article reconstruit les cadrages qui sous-tendent le discours selon lequel le projet de loi gouvernemental était « équilibré ». Ce document identifie les procédures de politisation et de dépolitisation (c’est-à-dire les projets de lois, les motions) et les cadrages (c’est-à-dire le langage et le discours) qui ont permis au gouvernement d’agir sur la question de l’avortement tout en gardant ses distances lors de l’élaboration et de la défense de la mesure législative. Ces cadrages fonctionnent en renvoyant la responsabilité à d’autres ordres de gouvernement et à la sphère privée, ainsi qu’en appelant au fatalisme par la mise en évidence de la nature rigide de l’avortement, des contraintes qui limitent l’action gouvernementale et de la nécessité de ne poursuivre que la solution proposée par le gouvernement. Les contradictions et tensions inhérentes aux cadrages indiquent des failles dans le discours selon lequel le projet de loi C-43 était une solution « équilibré » et peuvent aider à expliquer l’échec de la solution politique.
Mots-clés :
- la politique de l’avortement,
- R. c. Morgentaler,
- Canada,
- dépolitisation,
- le cadrage des politiques
Appendices
Bibliography
- Bates, S., Jenkins, L., & Amery, F. (2014). (De)politicisation and the Father’s Clause parliamentary debates. Policy & Politics, 42(2), 243–258.
- Beveridge, R. (2012). Consultants, depoliticization and arena-shifting in the policy process: Privatizing water in Berlin. Policy Sciences, 45, 47–68.
- Beveridge, R., & Naumann, M. (2014). Global norms, local contestation: Privatisation and de/politicisation in Berlin. Policy and Politics, 42(2), 275–291.
- Browne, A., & Sullivan, B. (2005). Abortion in Canada. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 14(3), 287–291.
- Burnham, P. (2001). New Labour and the politics of depoliticisation. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 3(2), 127–149.
- Canada, Parliament, House of Commons Debates (Hansard), 33rd Parliament, 2nd Session, Vol. 10, December 1987–February 1988. Ottawa: Her Majesty the Queen of Canada. Retrieved from http://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC3302_10
- Canada, Parliament, House of Commons Debates (Hansard), 33rd Parliament, 2nd Session, Vol. 11, February–April 1988. Ottawa: Her Majesty the Queen of Canada. Retrieved from http://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC3302_11
- Canada, Parliament, House of Commons Debates (Hansard), 33rd Parliament, 2nd Session, Vol. 12, April–May 1988. Ottawa: Her Majesty the Queen of Canada. Retrieved from http://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC3302_12
- Canada, Parliament, House of Commons Debates (Hansard), 33rd Parliament, 2nd Session, Vol. 13, May–July 1988. Ottawa: Her Majesty the Queen of Canada. Retrieved from http://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC3302_13
- Canada, Parliament, House of Commons Debates (Hansard), 33rd Parliament, 2nd Session, Vol. 14, July–August 1988. Ottawa: Her Majesty the Queen of Canada. Retrieved from http://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC3302_14
- Canada, Parliament, House of Commons Debates (Hansard), 34th Parliament, 2nd Session, Vol. 4, October–November 1989. Ottawa: Her Majesty the Queen of Canada. Retrieved from http://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC3402_04
- Canada, Parliament, House of Commons Debates (Hansard), 34th Parliament, 2nd Session, Vol. 5, November–December 1989. Ottawa: Her Majesty the Queen of Canada.
- Canada, Parliament, House of Commons Debates (Hansard), 34th Parliament, 2nd Session, Vol. 9, May–June 1990. Ottawa: Her Majesty the Queen of Canada. Retrieved from http://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC3402_09
- Diamond, P. (2015). New Labour, politicisiation and depoliticisation: The delivery agenda in public services 1997–2007. British Politics, 10(4), 429-453.
- Dunsmuir, M. (1998). Abortion: Constitutional and legal developments. Current Issue Review, 89, 1–25.
- Entman, R. M. (2004). Projections of power: Framing news, public opinion, and U.S.foreign policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Erikson, J. (2012). The various “problems” of prostitution—A dynamic frame analysis of Swedish prostitution policy. In M. Coy (Ed.), Prostitution, harm and gender inequality (pp. 159–177). New York: Taylor & Francis.
- Flanagan, T. (1997). The staying power of the legislative status quo: Collective choice in Canada’s Parliament after Morgentaler. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 30(1), 31–53.
- Flinders, M., & Wood, M. (2014). Depoliticisation, governance and the state. Policy & Politics, 42(2), 177–192.
- Halfmann, D. (2011). Doctors and demonstrators: How political institutions shape abortion law in the United States, Britain, and Canada. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Jenkins, L. (2011). The difference genealogy makes: Strategies for politicisation or how to extend capacities for autonomy. Political Studies, 59, 156–174.
- Jenson, J. (1992). Getting to Morgentaler: From one representation to another. In J. Brodie, S. A. M. Gavigan, & J. Jenson (Eds.), The politics of abortion (pp. 15–56). Toronto: Oxford University Press.
- Johnstone, R. (2017). After Morgentaler: The politics of abortion in Canada. Vancouver: UBC Press.
- Morton, F. L. (1992). Morgentaler v. Borowski: Abortion, the Charter, and the courts. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart.
- Mylchreest, I. (2001). Avoiding the issue down under: The politics of legalizing abortion in Australia. In C. Z. Mooney (Ed.), The public clash of private values: The politics of morality policy (pp. 227–243). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
- Neal, A. W. (2019). Parliamentary security politics as politicisation by volume. ERIS—European Review of International Studies, 5(3–2018), 70–93.
- Rasmussen, A. C. (2011). Contraception as health? The framing of issue categories in contemporary policy making. Administration & Society, 43(8), 930–953.
- Ross, K., Dodds, S., & Ankeny, R. A. (2009). A matter of conscience? The democratic significance of “conscience votes” in legislating bioethics in Australia. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 44(2), 121–144.
- Saurette, P., & Gordon, K. (2015). The changing voice of the anti-abortion movement: The rise of “pro-woman” rhetoric in Canada and the United States. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
- Studlar, D. T., & Tatalovich, R. (1996). Abortion policy in the United States and Canada: Do institutions matter? In M. Githens & D. M. Stetsen (Eds.), Abortion politics: Public policy in cross-cultural perspective. New York: Routledge.
- Tatalovich, R. (1997). The politics of abortion in the United States and Canada: A comparative study. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
- Tilli, J. (2009). An interpretation of Finnish religious nationalism: The four topoi of theological depoliticisation. Nations and Nationalism, 15(4), 597–615.
- Tromp, Stanley (Ed.) (2013). Cabinet and cabinet committee meeting minutes on abortion from 1988–1990. Retrieved from http://www3.telus.net/index100/minutes1
- Warhurst, J. (2008). Conscience voting in the Australian federal parliament. Australian Journal of Politics and History, 54(4), 579–596.
- Wolf, E. E. A., & Van Dooren, W. (2018). Conflict reconsidered: The boomerang effect of depoliticization in the policy process. Public Administration, 96, 286–301.
- Wood, M. (2016). Politicisation, depoliticisation and anti-politics: Towards a multilevel research agenda. Political Studies Review, 14(4), 521–533.
- Wood, M., & Flinders, M. (2014). Rethinking depoliticisation: Beyond the governmental. Policy & Politics, 42(2), 151–170.