Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 10 Hansard (25 November) . . Page.. 2842 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

Obviously, other legislation that the Assembly considers from time to time is less complex or less difficult than issues of this kind. But, Mr Speaker, at the end of the day, what we have before us is a piece of legislation which is on a path that the Assembly has trodden on a number of occasions before. I do not refer specifically to abortion legislation here; I refer to legislation which is about providing information to people undertaking certain processes or procedures. That concept is not new. That concept has been traversed by the Assembly on a number of occasions in the past, and that concept is one that I do not believe we need more than three months to properly consider.

In a sense, the Bill involves two fundamental issues. It involves the question of the form in which the information should be provided to women before they undertake an abortion and it involves, obviously, some overlying issues of abortion as such and what kind of involvement the parliament and others should have in the regulation of abortion. On the first question, Mr Speaker, I do not think there is any doubt that the Assembly has had enough time to be able to consider the fundamental questions about the nature of the information and the way in which it should be provided. Those provisions, in some form or another, have now been before the Assembly for the better part of three months. That is long enough to be able to consider and debate those issues.

On the question of abortion and the overlying issues about abortion, Mr Speaker, I would suggest, with respect, that three years would not be long enough to assist members of this place to move to some kind of resolution of those fundamental conflicts. Members of this place come to this place in, I suppose, all cases with strong predetermined views about issues like abortion. Perhaps there are people who have come to this place without such views. I would be surprised if there were any. But they come with those views, and I think, with respect, that any amount of time might pass and the chance of those members being prepared to change fundamentally what they believe about abortion per se is a very low chance indeed.

Bishop Randerson suggested, as quoted by Mr Corbell, that we should have a task force on this issue. With great respect to the bishop, I think the likelihood of, for example, members of this place getting together in some committee form and agreeing on issues as fundamental as abortion, finding some compromise on abortion per se - I put to one side for a moment the question of health information - is extremely unlikely, no matter how much time a task force or committee or select committee or whatever might be given.

Alternatively, some further work might be done on the structure of information to be provided to women. But, with respect, I think those issues are properly canvassed in the legislation as it now appears before the Assembly. Not many of the issues are particularly new. In fact, very few of them are especially new. I think the Assembly has had more than enough opportunity to be able to consider them in the time available. I know that it is nice to be able to, with a flourish, grandstand in these sorts of debates and look like the champion of a certain cause by arguing for things to be put off. But that is not necessarily in the interests of effective law-making and it is not, I think, in the interests of the community today, which deserves the chance to have this issue come to a head.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .