Barnaby Joyce (New England, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

Obviously, nobody can argue against or understand the grief a person can feel having a stillborn child. We are aware of so many people who have had miscarriages, aware of the concern they cause, and aware of the grief and sorrow that people carry for the rest of their lives. I wholly agree with in how the substance expressed in this chamber has been put forward but of course there is always a caveat that those of us here want to check. A number of us feel we do not we have a clear answer on this, so, unfortunately—I hate to bring it up—there remains the issue of late-term abortion. We have a right to know if it includes that, because we have a right to express our views if it does. We have concerns because, in a letter by Minister Gallagher, it appeared that late-term abortions were encompassed in this. During estimates Minister McAllister appeared to confirm the same, and that takes it into a completely different remit. We understand and respect people have different views but there are many of us who have spent much of our time in parliament making sure our views are incredibly clear on this issue.

We understand there are so many complexities, but I stand on the position that the day after a child is born, no matter what medical conditions or impairments that may be there, you have no right to interfere in their life. Therefore, the day before we believe it is the same. That is something I have lived by, and I think it is incredibly important for me to state my position on this. There must be a clarification on this issue. It must be clarified before we come to a vote. It must be from the minister before the bill is voted for and, either way, there must be honesty in exactly what the position is. I think we have the right to know where we vote and how we vote. On one instance, there is 100 per cent support, 100 per cent empathy, we completely understand—no questions about it. But on the extension of it, if that is where it goes, we have every right not to vote for it and we have every right to be informed of it. We have every right for people to be completely clear about this and exactly where it is.

Obviously, these debates at times can be most divisive and heated. I accept that. But the substance of this is just how you view the rights of the individual. We believe that a person, if they are not cognisant of their rights, does not give anybody a licence to extinguish their rights, because you are not cognisant of your rights when you are asleep, you are not cognisant of your rights if you are under a general anaesthetic and you're not cognisant of your rights probably below the age of two. But you have those rights and those rights stand.

As we know, we can have people born at 22 or 23 weeks and these people survive. We believe—others don't—we have a duty of care to stand in this parliament and stand up for those rights. It might be a very small portion, and I acknowledge that. It is not the generality and it might not even be what is intended for, but this clarification must happen. If people clarify that that is not the case—that it does not include late-term abortion—that is fine. But if it does, and it is not stated and has not been made clear then that means you are hiding it. People hide things because they believe that there are circumstances where people have a substantially different view and they do not want them to know about it. So I pose the question here. Does this proscribe, which means rule out, late-term abortions or not?

See this speech in context