Pallett Sarah; Mallard TrevorSARAH PALLETT (Labour—Ilam): Thank you Mr Speaker—thank you Mr Speaker. I rise in support of the Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion (Safe Areas) Amendment Bill. Once again we find ourselves discussing a bill by my wonderful colleague Louisa Wall and I congratulate her on all her work bringing it forward to this place. As Jan Logie just said this isn't a discussion about the rights and wrongs of abortion but I would go on to say about the fundamental right of people to access lawful healthcare or to provide lawful healthcare without being harassed intimidated or threatened or feeling fearful. This House has completed many debates on abortion. It was a long thorough and challenging process and abortion is now sitting firmly as lawful healthcare and no longer in the Crimes Act. Accessing abortion care and providing abortion care as a health practitioner are lawful activities. Now I do understand fully that people disagree that it should be lawful healthcare or even be provided at all but it is and the matter is settled. People do have very strong feelings on this issue and I fully acknowledge this. Some of these strong feelings find expression in protests outside abortion clinics and these protests can take a number of forms. They can involve posters or models of questionable accuracy and varying levels of gore. The provision of information can be distributed that is in my experience often fact-bereft and upsetting and there can be louder protests with high emotions—chanting singing sometimes hymns abuse and sometimes upsetting language of a vile and abusive nature. Many of the protesters would argue perhaps that they are only there to peacefully express their objection. Others might perhaps argue that their purpose is to change the minds of the people accessing healthcare that they themselves disapprove of. Some might say that they only wish to pray for the folk accessing healthcare or for the providers of healthcare. I speak here as an ex-convent girl of many years and someone whose mother was a Sunday school teacher: to pray for someone can be an act of enormous kindness but can I refer to Matthew 6 I believe where they say And when you pray do not be like the hypocrites who love to pray standing in the street corners to be seen but go to your room close the door and pray to your Father who is unseen." You don't need to pray directly in front of me or the person—and I apologise; I am not referring to you Mr Speaker. One does not need to pray directly in front of another person that they wish to pray for for their prayers to be effective. They can be effective silent and far away from the person that they are directed towards. If you consider that you need to pray loudly in front of the person for whom you are praying or one is praying for especially if it's because they are committing actions that you disapprove of perhaps one might want to consider whether the intention is prayer or performance. If your intention as a protester was to change the mind of the person on the way to accessing healthcare I have some news: it doesn't work. We know that sidewalk counselling serves only to traumatise already vulnerable people whose medical and social history can't be known and shouldn't be known by a bystander. As for the people who claim to be peaceful protesters and who would disagree that fear and intimidation experienced by women and healthcare providers is a reality I would refer them perhaps to incidents such as that experienced by the Hon James Shaw who was assaulted violently on the street by someone who had strong feelings about abortion care provision. In 2000 in Christchurch a man was found to have tunnelled underneath the abortion clinic at Lyndhurst with the intent of burning it down. Anonymous threats have been made to people who work at Southland clinic saying people who work at the clinic are legitimate targets. And the rangatahi who were actually mounting a counter-protest to the protests that you mentioned Nicola Grigg at Hagley Park were threatened with death only last week. I quote: "I'm going to bring a gun and blow you up." It's not OK. I do understand that some would argue vehemently that we are limiting—SPEAKER: Order! The member's time has expired. Before I call the next contribution to this debate I am aware of the fact that I have not heard from anyone who is opposing—while I'm on my feet everyone else sits down—the bill. I'm going to call a member. If there are members who oppose the bill could they please give me a note to indicate that so if there is to be some balance in the debate we get it."