NDP prepares for Halifax convention
FEDERAL POLITICS / Siksay lists proposed queer health resolutions
Dale Smith / National / Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Share |

WISH LIST. Gay NDP MP Bill Siksay mentions some proposed resolutions that may come up for debate at this weekend's convention, including sex reassignment surgery funding and a "comprehensive" queer health strategy.
Federal New Democrats are meeting this weekend in Halifax for the party’s 23rd policy convention, dubbed HFX09 — the first in three years.

“This convention is a pre-election event for New Democrats,” says NDP national director Brad Lavigne. “We’re bringing together the best, not only in Canada but across North America in terms of organizing and getting ready.”

The significance of the provincial NDP majority win in Nova Scotia is front-and-centre at the convention, and the party hopes to use Premier Darrell Dexter’s win as proof that perseverance and incremental growth pays off.

Lavigne laid out five goals for the convention: to build on pre-election momentum, to showcase public policy ideas, training for campaign workers, strengthening the party apparatus, and celebrating the party’s achievements.

“There is a policy vacuum in Ottawa, and New Democrats are going to be discussing new and innovative ideas, as well as those ideas that Canadians have come to count on New Democrats raising day in and day out in Parliament,” Lavigne says.

Among those policy initiatives are a few aimed at the queer community, including one to reverse the organ donor ban for men who have sex with men.

“There are a couple of resolutions supporting human rights for transgendered and transsexual Canadians, and supporting my private members’ bill,” says gay MP Bill Siksay. “It’s great to see that interest in the party to maintain that position.”

That bill, C-389, is likely to be debated in the House during the fall sitting of Parliament, provided that an election does not take place in autumn.

“The major [resolution] related to queer issues is one calling for a comprehensive queer health strategy,” Siksay says, adding that its foundations were in the work of the Rainbow Health Coalition.

“[It’s] also calling for access to sex reassignment surgery for those trans folks for whom that’s appropriate, and full coverage of it under medicare programs. Again, reaffirming positions that I’ve taken as the GLBT critic for the party and that the health critic has taken as well.”

While Siksay says that he’s pleased to see these resolutions, given that the convention book contains 137 pages of different resolutions, there is no guarantee that these ones will reach the convention floor.

Siksay says that he is especially looking forward to the meeting of the party’s queer caucus. “Over the years, some of my favourite memories of conventions are associated with the caucus and the meetings, some of the social events.”

Siksay also hopes that those members who felt disaffected after the divisive issue around age of consent came to a head during the previous convention in Quebec City will see the progress that has been made.

“One of the frustrations with any convention is what gets to the floor and what doesn’t,” Siksay says. “It’s a hard job for convention organizers to prioritize what resolutions come in, and then it’s a hard job for delegates to challenge the prioritization and to make changes to that. And that was part of what went on at the convention in Quebec City.”

At the 2006 convention, queer and youth members were silenced in a debate about age of consent, reported activist Andrew Brett.

“There were some hard feelings coming out of that, that we didn’t have the kind of discussion or the kind of conclusion around the age of consent stuff that would have been helpful,” Siksay says.

Siksay notes that the party’s federal council later opposed an increase in the age of consent and supported lowering the age of consent for anal sex. But party leader Jack Layton required all NDP MPs to vote in favour of a Conservative omnibus crime bill — which contained the age of consent provision — when it came to a vote in Nov 2007. Siksay was the only NDPer to vote against party lines, and he was disciplined for doing so.

Of the other major discussions at the convention, Siksay feels some ambivalence toward changing the party’s name, dropping the “New” as has been proposed.

“I’m a little leery of being associated with being associated with the Democratic Party of the United States because I do believe that there is a significant difference between the New Democratic Party of Canada and the Democratic Party in the US,” he says.

The other major proposal is to move to separate membership lists for federal and provincial sections of the party. Currently when one becomes an NDP member, they become a member of the provincial organization and are automatically made a federal member.

“Anytime you do anything federally, you have to ask for permission of the provincial party for the list,” Siksay says. “I remember when I was campaign manager for Svend Robinson’s leadership campaign, it was hard to get the lists in place, and that was your voters list essentially.  It was very frustrating and I was very frustrated at the time.”

“That being said, I think we’ve been really well served by the close connection between the federal and provincial sections, and New Democrats are New Democrats, where there hasn’t been that kind of distinction between federal and provincial,” he says. “Organizationally I think there’s some problems, but generally in broadest terms, it’s meant that we’ve been stronger — especially in places where we’re smaller. I think it’s served us well.”

HFX09 — the federal NDP convention — runs from August 14 to 16.
Ndp.ca.


Share |


Reader Comments


 
Once again, there is no organ ban!
I don't understand why Xtra keeps lying to its readers by even suggesting there is an "organ donor ban for men who have sex with men." It doesn't exist! Go donate your organs! I am curious as to what exactly Siksay said about the "organ donation ban" in particular. Any quotes about that? I seriously doubt he said much about it at all.
chrid, to ON
08/12/09 6:27 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Fact checking?????
In any other news outlet it is seen as bad if a reporter reports misinformation. This is the second time (that I know of) that the author of this article has posted misinformation about there being a ban on msm males donating organs. Why is this allowed to continue? What kind of fact checking (IF ANY) goes on at Xtra? Why should anyone trust anything this publiaction prints if they so openly tolerate incorrect facts in their reporting?
chrid, to on
08/12/09 6:31 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
organ donation
My understanding (I'm not an expert in the field or anything) is that they will take the donated organs of men who have sex with men but that they are considered "risky" and that special permission is required for them to be used on a case by case basis and only if "non-risky" organs are unavailable which considering the organ donor shortage is all the time I'm sure. Its not really a ban but organs from gay sexually active men are being treated differently than organs from other people, all organs are tested for health and well being before being used so I don't see the reasoning for this different treatment. Similarly with the ban on gay men donating blood, I used to lie so I could donate since its something I believe everyone should do but decided a couple years ago to lie no more about my sexual orientation even if it is for a good cause. Still I'd encourage everyone to sign up for organ donation and to tell your family and friends of your wishes, afterall once you're done with them why not use them to save a life.
Rich, Toronto Ontario
08/12/09 6:40 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
not misinformation
The reporter for this story didn't get anything wrong, "Among those policy initiatives are a few aimed at the queer community, including one to reverse the organ donor ban for men who have sex with men." You may not agree with the terminology being used but its the wording used by the NDP and other political types in talking about this issue, its not something that this reporter made up and there is a difference in the way gay and hetero organ donors are treated with a clear preference for hetero organs, so it may not be an outright ban it is still discrimination for no good reason. I don't think this reporter or Xtra have anything to apologize for in their reporting.
Rich, Toronto Ontario
08/12/09 6:55 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
[Editor's Note]
Re: Fact checking?????
Chris: anti-gay discrimination is still in place on organ donations. Yes, doctors can use a sexually-active gay man's organs if the recipient consents and the doctor signs an "exceptional release" form. As far as I see it, that amounts to a "ban" (though not an outright ban) that can be overruled only by meeting certain onerous requirements.
Brent Creelman, Toronto ON
08/12/09 7:03 PM EST
News outlets are responsible for what they print
There is no ban on organ donation. To say thre is a ban on organ donation is misinformation. If the NDP calls it a "ban" and a news outlet wants to report that, it is the responsibility of the news outlet to recognize what the actual facts are before reporting the story. Even if Xtra wants to use the NDPs terminology, they could at least put it in quotes because, like it or not, when people read that there is an "organ donor ban for men who have sex with men" (not the NDPs words, but Xtra's) then SURPRISE! People are led to believe MSM men are prohibited from donating. They are not. And ANYONE WHO PARTICIPATES IN RISKY SEXUAL BEHAVIOUR ARE TREATED AS HIGH RISK, NOT JUST MSM MALES. Sheesh.
chrid, to on
08/12/09 7:09 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Re: Fact checking?
Chris - I'm simply reporting on the resolutions as they appear in party documents, not passing judgement on their individual merit. That's for the party membership to decide. As for what exactly Mr. Siksay said, I have tape and transcript to prove that he spoke about how the party has "taken a strong stand on that" issue, but again, it was in relation to the resolution package that that the party distributed to media outlets.
Dale Smith, Ottawa ON
08/12/09 7:12 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
sdfs
Brent, this is about MSM males (men who have sex with men), not gay men. There is a big difference (you need not be gay to be a man who sleeps with another man). Your mistake once again underscores that 1) people at Xtra do not understand this organ thing and 2)medical reporting should be left to people with training in medical/science writing. Otherwise you are just leading your readers astray with incorrect information.
chrid, to on
08/12/09 7:23 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
what did he say?
Dale Smith, did Siksay ever use the term "organ ban" himself? What did he say?
chrid, to on
08/12/09 9:31 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Tell it to the Manitoba NDP!
“[It’s] also calling for access to sex reassignment surgery for those trans folks for whom that’s appropriate, and full coverage of it under medicare programs. Again, reaffirming positions that I’ve taken as the GLBT critic for the party and that the health critic has taken as well.” Maybe the NDP in Manitoba could set the example by reversing their position to not fund Sex Reassignment surgery!
Sam, Winnipeg Manitoba
08/13/09 9:48 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
I totally agree, Sam
The Manitoba NDP's stance on sex-reassignment surgery is unconscionable. But then, I have maintained for a number of years that Gary Doer is one of these disgusting "Third Way" Blairite-type creatures, sort of a Liberal in Social Democrat's clothing. And it is no credit to the Manitoba NDP that they have retained him so long as a leader. What good is electoral success for the NDP if they then just become Liberal-lite? Oh, there's MANY things I could go on about in regards to what a miserable disappointment the Manitoba NDP has been under "Third Way Gary"...
Nathanial, Slocan Valley BC
08/14/09 12:43 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
NDP = Dinosaurs
Will these decrepit losers, union thugs, creepy child molesting leftists, and all the other societal garbage that compose the irrelevant and imploding NDP just go away forever? Go ahead and change your name to Obama's party...siphon off some Liberal support and split the loony left even more. It's hilarious! The Green Party has stolen 40% of your already tiny base support. You are NOTHING and will always be NOTHING.
ron, Vancouver Bc
08/16/09 1:08 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Wipe the spittle off your jowls, Ron
"I didn't say that all Conservatives are stupid; I said that most stupid people VOTE Conservative." -- Edmund Burke (That's about all the time I'm willing to invest in responding to the type of hysterical wailing pumped out by Harpokon drones and "useful idiots" such as you, Ron.)
Nathanial, Slocan Valley BC
08/16/09 10:24 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.