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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 9 Hansard (18 November) . . Page.. 2591 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

is basically made up of the amendments circulated by Mr Humphries which Mr Osborne and Mr Humphries presented as doing two things. They said all they would do is provide for a 72-hour cooling-off period. That is the first thing. The second thing is that they would ensure the provision of information prepared by two doctors and so on.

Of course, that is not true, Mr Speaker. It is untrue because it goes much further than that. It is not as totally and completely appalling as Mr Osborne's first Bill, but it is not far off it. It will still mean that there will be a restriction on the way abortion is done. Do not be mistaken, Mr Speaker. In moving to suspend standing orders, what Mr Osborne is doing is seeking to introduce this piece of legislation that will mean that there is a restriction on how people go about abortion.

Abortions will still occur in this Territory no matter what piece of legislation we pass here. The only question that members have to ask themselves is: Will they be conducted safely, will women's choices be recognised, and will women die because they make this choice and they go to somebody who is not qualified to carry out the abortion? That is what the debate is about in this Assembly. That is what suspending standing orders is going to lead us into.

It seems to me, Mr Speaker, that we ought not suspend the standing orders because we should ensure that our processes are right. I have to say that, once again, Mr Osborne's processes in this Assembly are inadequate. He only had to copy his colleague sitting next to him, Mr Rugendyke, and seek leave to introduce a Bill like that on the daily program. It is much more likely that leave would have been given.

MR KAINE (11.03): Mr Speaker, I will say up front that I support the suspension of standing orders in this instance and I do so because that will remove from the notice paper of this place a Bill that almost everybody finds objectionable. That seems to me to be a pretty good case.

Mr Berry: No, you are wrong. I think Mr Kaine is mistaken.

MR KAINE: My Labor colleagues, who I presume in a minute are going to vote against the suspension of standing orders, although they have made it - - -

Mr Berry: I take a point of order. I think Mr Kaine is mistaken. This is about the introduction of a Bill, not a withdrawal.

Mr Moore: This is about introducing a new Bill. He said he will do the other one later, and none of us are going to object to that.

MR SPEAKER: Mr Kaine, you know you can address the suspension of standing orders.

MR KAINE: Mr Speaker, we are talking about the suspension of standing orders to allow a process to take place. Mr Moore spent a great deal of time saying just that, and he was concerned about the process. Well, I am concerned about the fact that certain people get to their feet in this place and present themselves as being self-righteous people

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