Oh.

Toronto Star:

Martin admitted yesterday that his position on the handling of the abortion issue in Parliament would be little different than Harper's.
He said a Liberal government would not bring in abortion legislation but would allow a free vote by MPs — with the exception of cabinet ministers — if an MP brought a bill forward.

Sun :

After presenting himself as a protector of women's rights and slamming Stephen Harper for failing to make his intentions on abortion clear, Paul Martin says he'll let backbenchers vote their conscience on the issue.
This week Martin insisted he would instruct all Liberal MPs and senators to vote against any bill that sought to ban abortion and that his new government would stand firmly in favour of a woman's right to have an abortion.
But yesterday he told reporters in St. John's that he would treat a Commons vote on the issue in the same manner he did last year's decision on same-sex marriage -- by whipping his cabinet but unleashing backbenchers.

Globe:

"We know that a majority of [Mr. Harper's] MPs want to have it," he said of an abortion ban. "We know very well that if a majority of Liberal MPs are elected, it will not pass. And we know at the same time that if a majority of Conservative MPs are elected, it will pass."

That's what the "fundamental difference in values" boils down to, then: a few MPs either way. And it's not clear Martin's logic holds even there. Let's assume there are more Tory pro-life candidates than there are Liberal pro-life candidates. Does it follow that a Parliament with a majority of Conservative MPs would be more likely to ban abortion than a Parliament with a majority of Liberal MPs? Seems to me it depends on which MPs from either party are elected, since in a free vote it's individual MPs, not the parties, that decide the issue. So: if your only issue in this election is preserving abortion rights, you should survey your local candidates' positions on it, and vote accordingly. But as far as the two parties' are concerned, their positions are more or less identical: a free vote if necessary, but not necessarily a free vote. Sort of makes you wonder what all the screaming is about.