Page 3848 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 27 August 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
government’s position on school closures changed. For 15 years we had this consistent opposition to any closure of any school and then, suddenly, whammo, the government made a 180 degree turn and wanted to close 39 schools. So do not talk to me about hypocritical positions.
My views have been consistent; they have not changed. I do not believe that innocent life should be destroyed. Certainly we have all heard of people who have had dreadful experiences deciding whether or not to keep a child. Despite your criticism of it, one of the more sensible attempts to debate this contentious issue in the Assembly, I thought, was when Messrs Osborne, Humphries and Moore actually got together and came up with some legislation that actually seemed to strike a reasonable balance. Michael Moore was hardly a big “c” conservative. Michael Moore was very much on the left side of politics, but the compromise position was acceptable to him. It was a compromise that I think worked.
Members have spoken about a cooling-off period. It was suggested that it is not like buying a car. No, it is far more important than just buying a car. This is someone’s life. This is a woman’s decision about whether she wants to have a baby or not have a baby. I would have thought that if the woman is uncertain the more information and the more thought that goes into helping her come to a conclusion, the better. That was the purpose behind the cooling-off period.
The government often makes much about education and the need for people to be informed. I recall that the idea behind all those pictures was merely to educate and to provide sufficient assistance to ensure that people did really appreciate just what was actually going to occur. I think you are really going off on a large number of tangents there.
I know it is an emotional issue. It has been emotional for you, Mr Speaker, since you came here. You have championed a certain point of view. We have different ideas. I think that Mr Pratt’s proposed amendment is quite a reasonable amendment to Mr Gentleman’s motion. Who really could quibble with paragraph (1), which refers to the issue being a conscience vote? It always has been, and people in the Assembly and the community have a range of views on it. Paragraph (3) states:
regardless of those views, the incidence of abortion in our society is a concern.
Members who have expressed pro-choice sentiments tonight have made that very point. I think you, Mr Speaker, made that point tonight. You have made it consistently in terms of your pro-choice stance. You still say, however, that the incidence in our society is a concern. Paragraph (4) states:
the re-introduction of criminal sanctions is not the solution to this problem.
It is not the solution now, if indeed it ever was. Who could quibble with paragraph (5):
providing greater support to women who experience crisis pregnancies is a matter of the greatest importance.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .