Burning bright on a rainy day.
Rain poured down steadily as I looked up at the majestic sodden Parliament buildings on a wet day in downtown Ottawa. Some of the bricks were darkened by the precipitation. Despite the on pour, the Centennial flame burned brightly as visitors huddled around, trying not to bump one another with their umbrellas.
As I climbed the steps towards the Centre block, a few drenched protestors wearing ponchos were scattered about, dejectedly holding signs that indicated their cause: Climate Justice.
Craving some shelter, I splashed onward up the steps to the Visitor’s Centre. Once inside, I waited in line with what I observed to be a diverse group of people. A blind woman was guided through the line by a government official. A small Asian baby bobbled out of line, giggling, and those waiting in the lineup smiled at the frazzled dad who followed closely behind.
The security check was extensive. It was conducted by officials dressed in shades of blue, and caps adorned with gleaming gold maple leafs. There were plenty of these officials, and they cheerfully directed us to the House of Commons. This building is a well-run machine, and at every turn there was someone asking you how they might help.
A lineup similar to the one downstairs awaited us before entering the House of Commons. Following the coat and bag check, we were silently ushered in. Initially, I was leaning in and having a hard time hearing. It took a minute or two to discover the small, black telephone located to the left of the seat in order to hear the topic being hotly debated. I felt pretty silly. All around me I watched people who entered make the same mistake. The topic of the moment was “Motion 312”.
“Motion 312” seemed to be a sly way to reintroduce the abortion debate. A blonde, Conservative, female MP from Kitchener introduced the subject. She went on at length with much information about the development of a fetus, concluding that she would “only like to align the Criminal Code’s definition of a human with that of science”. She at no point made it clear that this was an abortion argument, but it was strongly implied.
The opposition’s rebuttal was fierce, and the NDP woman who spoke, impassioned. She cut right to the abortion implication of the Motion, and strongly advocated for a woman’s right to choose. Her anger was fuelled by the fact that the abortion debate has been closed for many years. She also felt that internationally Canada has blazed the trail on this issue, and taking a step backwards diminishes our position. It was evident that she was furious, and it made her all the more compelling.
I left feeling simultaneously exasperated and inspired. I walked out into the rain, towards the flame, and away from the action.
Girl About Town 