I would like to take you to task for [your second issue of Consent]. The Family Coalition Party [FCP] is not the place to spend your time. It is unlikely to go anywhere. There is more than ample material to attack the PCs, Liberals, and NDP. I think that we want to hear more about how you would govern, and not so much about how a group like the FCP would or would not.

As I remarked to [FP Action Director] Marc Emery a few weeks ago on the phone, I was not very impressed with the total program that Freedom Party had in mind. It looked like anarchy to me. I think that we have to hear a lot more about Freedom Party in areas other than BIAs and Sunday shopping. There is much more than this going on out there. What would you do about health care?

I see that your candidate is for [the right to] abortions, but not letting OHIP pay for them. I think that is about where Van Der Zalm stands, and I'm afraid that I couldn't vote for him. I don't like abortions either, but better that, than what happens to so many babies that come into the world not wanted. And, if we collectively pay for medical services in true insurance [which has a lot of advantages], then should not services such as abortions be part of that service?

There is much to be considered and said about Freedom Party. Don't waste your money and time on mostly irrelevant issues such as the FCP.

March, 1986
David E. Bawden
WILLOWDALE, Ontario

EDITOR: We only wish that the Family Coalition Party was irrelevant. The article to which you've referred, "Aborting our Freedoms - The Goal of the FCP" was written by FP Action Director Marc Emery immediately following Ontario's 1987 provincial election. As a candidate in the riding of Middlesex, he was astounded by the amount of influence exerted by the FCP and by its unusually high vote returns. Unusual, that is, for a political party still in its infancy.

As a political phenomenon, the FCP represents a fragmenting of the right - a factor that has weighed heavily in the policy decisions of the major three parties, particularly the Progressive Conservatives. Whether most of us like to believe it or not - or whether we understand it or not - it is our intellectual and philosophic environment that will determine the course of our political future. The FCP offers us an opportunity to investigate this environment from a unique perspective and thus allows us to better understand the types of things that motivate the major parties. It goes a lot deeper than simple "votes". Understanding and knowledge are valuable weapons in the political world of ideas; that's why we produce Consent. [See related article, elsewhere in this issue.]

The suggestion that Freedom Party's platform looks like "anarchy" is completely unfounded. Our platform repeatedly states: "Freedom Party believes that the purpose of government is to protect your freedom of choice, not to restrict it." Most "anarchists" we know would argue that there is no purpose to government, so the onus is on those who label us in this manner to provide concrete evidence of their claim. In the absence of any specifics, we can't really deal with such accusations. If there's a specific issue in question, we can always prove that we're not "anarchists".

What would we do about healthcare? Privatize. End universality in government health care programs. Create competition in health care services. Allow doctors the freedom to be independent - professionally and financially. Just for starters. [For more information on the subject, we refer you to our issue papers "OHIP - Separating the Facts from the Myths and Opinions" and "Healthcare: The Hawkesbury Solution". As it happens, an upcoming feature in Consent will also be dealing with this subject.]

As to the issue of abortion, the principle behind our position is much more involved than simply "not letting OHIP pay for them". [See our issue paper: "The Moral Dilemma: Freedom of Choice in Abortion".]

As you suggest, there is no reason whatsoever why a "true insurance" plan shouldn't be allowed to pay for such a service - If that is part of the plan. But OHIP is far from being a "true" insurance plan. In fact, as an insurance plan, OHIP is a big lie. It's "contributors" are forced to contribute; it is not voluntary. Competitive insurance plans have been outlawed by government. OHIP premiums supply less than 12% of our medical costs [the balance being paid through taxes] and the whole system is morally, ethically and financially bankrupt. Worse, the services that OHIP supposedly provides, out health care benefits, have been seriously compromised to the point where emergency patients are dying on waiting lists. So what would we do about health insurance? Privatize. End universality. Create competition.

We sense an understandable degree of frustration in your comment that "we have to hear a lot more about Freedom Party in areas other than BIAs and Sunday shopping." We agree - but where did you get the impression those are our only two issues?

Two newsletters ago, we devoted our entire issue of Freedom Flyer to "The Labour Issue" and chronicled several labour campaigns in which Freedom Party was completely successful in attaining its objectives. We've expanded our participation in provincial elections, where we publicly deal with every political issue under the sun. If any Freedom Party member or supporter wants evidence of our past involvement in issues ranging from censorship to taxation, just ask.

It is through all the issues we get involved with that we can launch our attacks against the PCs, Liberals and New Democrats. Yes, we'd like to do a lot more. And contrary to the assumptions of some, we're not limited by our principles or platform; we exist because of them. Our only limitation in actively and effectively dealing with issues of a broader scope and greater magnitude is the level of financial and volunteer support we get. If, as you say, "there is much to be considered and said about Freedom Party", it should be clear what you [and many of our other members and supporters] have to do to make this possible.

Originally published: Freedom Flyer 13