Up against Wall...

by Anthony Ward.

The New Zealand University Students' Association today condemned Parliament as "totally irresponsible" for passing the Hospitals Amendment Bill into law. The Bill allows legal abortions to be performed only in public hospitals or approved private hospitals and will lead to the closure of the Auckland Medical Aid Centre.

The General Vice President of NZUSA, Mr John Blincoe, said that supporters of the BUI had dishonestly claimed that they were concerned to maintain high standards of care and prevent commercial exploitation.

"In fact," he continued, "The Bill's main effect is to deprive New Zealand women of the excellent yet relatively inexpensive service provided by the Centre, itself a non-profit making trust".

"Obviously the only real aim of the Bill's promoters was to limit the number of legal abortions that could be performed safely and cheaply in this country," Mr Blincoe stated. "There is certainly no doubt that this BilI will increase human suffering, and I hope that fact sorely troubles the consciences of those who supported it".

Many women would now be forced to go into expensive private hospitals or to Australia. There was no doubt that desperation would drive some women to back-street abortionists or to attempting self-induced abortions.

Mr Blincoe pointed out that all four women members of Parliament had pleaded for the BilI to be rejected be had been overruled by most of their mate colleagues. The advice of the Justice Department had also been ignored. Even the pleas of the Minister of Health for Parliament not to impose onerous yet ill-defined responsibilities upon his department by way of a badly-drafted Bill were rejected.

"History will record the passage of the Hospitals Amendment Bill as a reactionary and repugnant episode in New Zealand's legislative history." Mr Blincoe said. "I hope that the people of this country will never again have to witness such a sorry display of legislative hypocrisy and incompetence," he concluded.

John Blincoe General Vice President.

Dr. Wall, the MP for Porirua, has been doing rather disturbing things in Parliament recently. The first, and the one most debate has centred on so far, concerns his two-clause Hospitals Ammendment Bill. Given its third reading last week, it is now required only that the Governor General's signature make it law.

And a singularly nasty law it is too. The primary motive behind the Bill was clearly to close down the Auckland Medical Aid Centre (alias Remuera Abortion Clinic), a clinic that despite police and official harassment (e.g. the seizing of patients' files) has not been shown to have broken any law.

The forthcoming trial of Dr Woolnough (which followed from last year's illegal Police seizure of patient records from the Clinic) [unclear: is]

Dr. Wall and his supporters have from time to time portrayed the Bill as more than an attack on the Remuera Clinic. This is pure bunkum, as was clearly revealed when Wall himself accepted Highet's ammendment to restrict abortions to public and private hospitals. Highet later said he thought this covered the Remuera Clinic, and when he found it didn't he tried to put the words 'or clinic' in the bill as well. This Wall and his mates were not prepared to tolerate. Highet was eventually one of the three National MPs who voted against the Bill.

It is noticeable that all four women MPs opposed the Bill, as have a wide cross-section of the population. Prof. Munz pointed out the similarity to a Bill of Attainder — if someone or something you don't like isn't breaking the law you put through a special act of Parliament to ban them. Rex Hunton, on Radio Windy, said he was personally opposed to abortion but saw a need for it in present society as the lesser of two evils. This humanitarianism is in marked contrast to Wall's prejudices running not.

If Dr. Wall really had any concern for women's wellbeing his Bill would have had some provision for increased help and care for mothers (SPUC has provided some facilities in this line). Yet nowhere does any such concern appear in his two clauses — the Bill is solely aimed at closing the Remuera Clinic, and not at easing any of the social or personal problems that gave rise to the need for it.

Further to this, there is little or no recognition by Wall of something spelt out very clearly in the debates — that the rich will still be able to go on trips to Aussie, while the poor will have to suffer unwanted pregnancies to full term. Social justice? Don't make me laugh.

While ideally abortions should be freely available on public clinics and hospitals, in the absence of these the Remuera Clinic (which is non-profit) is fulfilling a real need efficiently and relatively cheaply. Wall's Bill to close it down is narrow minded, short sighted and repressive.

That conclusion is immensely strengthened by the latest of the M.P. for Porirua's moves. This is the proposed Ammendment to Vern Young's Crimes Ammendment bill (reprinted alongside). This basically makes it an offence punishable by two years jail to try and tell anyone under the age of 20 that homosexuality is normal. Clause c is aimed specifically at banning Gay Lib — Wall seems to like going in for Bills of Attainder. The unanimous reaction to this document on campus last Friday was 'Fuck!' It is a matter of the utmost concern that such a Bill can be proposed by a man who is supposed to be interested in social justice. One hopes that Wall will get thrown out on his arse from Porirua in November — but then hoping is not enough.