SpeechHon AMY ADAMS (National—Selwyn): I am very honoured to take the last call in the passage of this legislation through the House and I feel extremely proud actually to have played some small part in its passage to its point. Abortion legislation is of course deeply personal and we've heard through the debate over the last few days and weeks very personal stories from all sides of the debate about how it affects not only members of this House but the people they know and love and it's no different for me. I have sat with and held the hand over my life of women that I know and love who have had to make an incredibly difficult decision to have an abortion. I have seen them face the delays the difficulties the struggles the judgment and the abuse frankly and feel marginalised and criminalised because of our law and that is not OK. I am very proud that in my last few months in this House I get to be a part of—hopefully—putting that right for women today. I've heard throughout this debate a number of people in the House—particularly of those who are supporting the bill—be at pains to say that they respect the rights and the views of everyone in this House and that their views in the debate are all valid. Interestingly enough I haven't heard those views expressed much by the voice of those opposing this legislation and I find it somewhat staggering that those who preach freedom of expression and religious tolerance the most are the least tolerant of those who are supporting this legislation. If religious leaders in our community want to do something about unwanted pregnancies then perhaps they could stop teaching that contraception is a sin. That would go a long way towards advancing the views and the rights of women. I want to acknowledge and thank the Minister of Justice for bringing in this legislation. It is not an easy topic to tackle but after 44 years it is well past time for this bill to pass. It is time that our law was changed so that it isn't outdated and incredibly paternalistic. We've heard in this debate before—and I'm borrowing comments that others have made—that when this law was passed there were only four women members. In fact there were more men called William in this House than there were women MPs. The fact that it has taken us until now to relook at this isn't acceptable but at least we are here today. The current law is incredibly flawed and I have found it difficult to listen to those who have stood in this House and claimed that there's no problem with the framework as there is. I would respectfully suggest to those people that they should get out and talk to and hear from some of the women that we heard from in the Abortion Legislation Committee and not just the women but their families their doctors and their counsellors who told us time and time again about how difficult and traumatic and needlessly heartless this process was. So to those who are voting against the bill if you're true to your word and this isn't just an opposition to abortion full stop then recognise and hear from the women who are telling you that the current law is not serving New Zealand women well. We are now behind so many countries in the world. A country that prides itself on being a world leader in women's rights and equality and fairness and justice and we have now let ourselves fall behind. So when speakers ask if my conscience will be clear tonight my conscience will be absolutely clear and in fact I will feel proud to have done my bit to stand up for the women in New Zealand. I've said in this House before in my contributions that I have an absolutely innate view that Parliament needs to stay out of the medical and personal decisions of women's lives. Women have an absolute inalienable right to control their bodies and their reproductive systems. It would be utterly unconscionable for any woman to be forced to have a child she doesn't want—it would be unconscionable and it would not be the right thing for that child. I'm very happy to brand myself a feminist. I'm very happy to stand up for the rights of women and to respect the autonomy of women and I will continue to do that. I trust women—I trust women. I trust them not to make the sorts of irresponsible decisions we've heard thrown around this House as examples of what might happen. Women do not wake up late in their pregnancy and have just changed their minds for no reason. Women do not callously throw away a much-wanted pregnancy because of a difficult diagnosis. Any number of women will come and tell you—and did come and tell the select committee—exactly that and I also understand the role of doctors in this. Doctors are not mindless automatons who'd go along with anything. Doctors have to satisfy their own conscience their ethics their professional obligations and their Hippocratic oath. They make these decisions very carefully and only when they're appropriate clinically and ethically. This House doesn't belong in those decisions. We don't do it for any other medical decision. We shouldn't do it to express control over women's reproductive rights. I want to touch for a minute on the issue of safe zones because I am disappointed that this House late one night last week took them out of this bill. It's not the biggest part of this bill but I do not accept that this is policing speech. What I've seen happen personally and have heard stories of actually amounts to psychological abuse and torture and I don't think any woman seeking the help that she needs in making such a difficult decision needs to be abused intimidated and threatened. I've even heard stories of members of this House being threatened in a number of ways which I won't detail because of their own privacy because of their views in this House. If that is the mechanism by which the anti-abortion protesters operate then they don't deserve the right that we would normally expect in terms of protest. I would support safe zones and if I have the chance to support them in another forum I will again. Listening to the debate tonight I feel saddened that a number of the people who have decided not to support the legislation didn't take the time to come and sit in on some of the select committee's work. For those listening at home every member of Parliament can sit in on a select committee and be part of it. There are the members that are appointed but every member is welcome in all select committee processes. I've listened to the debate tonight and I've heard members who I respect and who I know have thought about this express concerns about things like the support available to women and express concerns about how for example younger women could reach out and get the support they need. I've heard concerns expressed around the way decisions would be made and the information that would be portrayed and I'd just say to those members that if you had sat through the committee and seen the way we worked through that carefully—we agonised over it and we heard a range of evidence on it—I don't know that you would have reached the views that you have reached. I do think that we need to trust women as I've said and yet we've heard people in this House say Yes we need to trust women." but then say they're going to be voting to take those decisions off women. It isn't right. It is time for this House to understand that women have the right to control their bodies and this House and our lawmaking does not have the right to intervene in that. I think those who are voting against this legislation—their views are their own but I think they are out of step with New Zealand. I think this House is in grave danger of becoming far more socially conservative than New Zealand and we do a disservice to New Zealand when we get out of step with the views of New Zealand. Like many of you—and I've heard others say it—on conscience issues I take a lot of time talking to my community in my constituency. I represent a constituency that wouldn't be regarded as urban liberal by any stretch of the imagination and I can tell you that the very strongly held majority view—not exclusively absolutely. But the very strongly expressed and held majority view is why wouldn't we pass this legislation? It seems a no-brainer to so many and yet we run the risk of allowing a very vocal minority largely in my view directed by the religious leaders across New Zealand—although I accept that may not be true for all. We run the risk of allowing them to derail important legislative reform. In my last few minutes I want to—as others have done—pay tribute to Dame Margaret Sparrow and others who have advocated tirelessly for this reform. It is time I hope as a majority across this House to get this work done and I want to vote for this legislation in the belief that it will mean for women finally that they won't have to face the shame the delays and the lack of equity of access to receive a service that every woman in New Zealand is entitled to have without this House making that decision for her."