Page 2651 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 25 August 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Lamont: Because you would not do that.
MR MOORE: I would not do that. Madam Speaker, the Liberals cannot get away with that. People like Mr De Domenico, who has already spoken, and Mr Humphries have had a totally consistent approach. They are quite clear as to the stance they take. By taking that stance they are going to lose some votes and they are going to win some votes. That is great. That is where they stand and people can judge them on that. Similarly, Madam Speaker, I am quite happy to stand up and to say that I support the right to choose, and I also support appropriate access and equity. That is why it is that I feel very comfortable about opposing this rather inadequate motion.
MS SZUTY (11.49): Madam Speaker, like my colleague Mr Moore, I oppose the motion proposed by Mr Humphries. I stated at the time that this Assembly debated the Termination of Pregnancy (Repeal) Bill that I believed, as I do now, that women in Canberra need a comprehensive service when they face the decision about whether to terminate a pregnancy or not. I support and applaud the Government for supporting the Family Planning Association, a group well known and credentialled in the provision of sexual health services which is prepared to better meet the needs of women who require abortion services.
I have examined the figures presented during the public hearing on the capital works program which detail the total cost of refurbishing premises for the Family Planning Association. That cost is somewhere between $40,000 and $45,000, an amount which would have been expended, no doubt, regardless of the future use of the space to be refurbished, as Mr Berry has already mentioned. Currently the Family Planning Association also receives a further $50,000 in recurrent funding to fund a counsellor's position. National and State governments have long recognised the work that the Family Planning Association does in the community, including counselling and educating on matters of sexual health.
In the ACT, part of the counsellor's role would, I expect, involve counselling on abortion, but until now, in most instances, that counselling occurred several hundred kilometres away from the clinic which would carry out the procedure. This is one of the most important factors in this debate. Counselling is most appropriate and effective for people when it is offered in the context of what is occurring for them. Women in Canberra have suffered for too long by having their decision to proceed with a pregnancy termination separated from available support services. Mostly they have travelled interstate for the procedure and received counselling back in Canberra only when they sought it out. Instead of receiving appropriate counselling on the decision itself, post-abortion counselling and contraceptive counselling, most women receive minimal support in making their decision and little or no follow-up counselling or support. This situation cannot be allowed to continue in 1993.
Again I refer back to comments I made in the debate last year. Abortion is not an illegal activity in Australia. However, the availability of the procedure has been severely restricted in Canberra. Women's health must suffer when the service provided is fragmented and is physically separated from the woman's home and community. Women in Canberra deserve better and I do not believe that the tone
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .