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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 9 Hansard (2 September) . . Page.. 2838 ..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

Mr Speaker, the fundamental question for the entire abortion debate is not the question of choice. That is the easy way out. The real question is: Where does life begin? We have those who say that they are pro-choice, but what they actually mean is that they are pro-abortion and they hide behind the pro-choice line because it takes away the fundamental question of where does life begin. During the debate in November I asked those in this place who are pro-abortion to tell me where life begins. Why, Mr Speaker? If we actually knew that, if we could determine that, we would not have to have this debate because the information would be superfluous. If we could confirm where life began, we would not actually allow abortion. I did not get an answer. I did not get an answer in the last debate and would not have expected to get an answer in this debate.

MR SPEAKER: Order! I would remind members that we are not debating the motion of November. We are debating pictures or something else.

MR SMYTH: No, that is fine, but it is what the pictures refer to, Mr Speaker. Let us not hide behind those lines about pro-abortion or pro-choice. These pictures are of the young unborn. They are pictures of unborn human beings, Mr Speaker. If I were pro-abortion, I would not want my arguments in favour of abortion clearly and easily undermined by the simple, undeniable, irrefutable, clear, distinguishable, recognisable truth that these pictures show. It is information. It is knowledge and that knowledge is power.

I believe that the pictorial information will enable women - in fact, empower women - to make an informed decision. I believe that the right decision is not to have an abortion as that is the destruction of human life. People are afraid that women will receive this information because they know that it destroys their argument.

I have asked those who are pro-abortion to tell me where life begins. Again, I will not get an answer. But there is, of course, the possibility that it will simply come down to conflicting scientific studies and personal opinion. That is okay. I can live with that. But on many occasions in this place, particularly in relation to environmental issues, reference is made to the precautionary principle that if you do not know you should not do any harm. Indeed, this principle was trotted out again a few days ago. Based on that, if those who are pro-abortion do not know when life begins, surely abortion should not be undertaken.

Mr Speaker, reference was made to expert panels. Mr Humphries was quite accurate in saying that the change of use study was conducted by the Assembly's own expert. Members were consulted and asked whom they would like to conduct the review of the change of use charge and they came up with the name of an individual. That individual did a report, a very good report, but because we did not like the answer we disregarded it. Mr Humphries' assessment of the comments that were passed on that day is quite true; members opposite did not like the umpire's decision so they just would not accept it.

Mr Kaine is right in this regard, Mr Speaker. What Mr Kaine has said is exactly true. That is what we are charged with. That is what we are elected for. That is what we do. We make the legislation. We are elected to do it. We are not elected to cop out and say

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