SpeechHon ALFRED NGARO (National): Thank you Mr Chair. Before I begin I just want to say that the disrespect that was shown to my colleague here Melissa Lee by Marja Lubeck really was uncalled for. She was emotive she was just sharing from her heart and I just felt that it was a bit disrespectful in the committee. When people have shared from their hearts we've just respected their views. We may have been opposite their view but we've just respected—so I just felt that a bit of respect could have been shown.I want to stand up and speak to the current Minister in the chair the Hon Willie Jackson and hope that he'll take note especially with the officials. When the Minister the Hon Andrew Little was making some remarks especially in relation to the Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) by Joanne Hayes—SOP 463—he used the scenario in regards to the fact of those who had been raped or of incest. I noticed that they often used the most extreme scenario as a way of justifying the position that they had. I want to put on record—and if the Minister had read through the proposed amendments particularly in the explanatory note on the opposite page on page 2—it was clearly highlighted by my colleague Joanne Hayes that in circumstances where there is concern that a minor could be at risk if her parents were notified the law already provides alternative solutions. Those solutions were in the Oranga Tamariki Act 1989; section 31 of the Care of Children Act. Those provisions are already there. So what this Act was actually speaking to—and I'm sure the current Minister in the chair the Hon Willie Jackson will acknowledge the fact—is that there are circumstances especially with our Māori and our Pacific whānau in which the cultural construct is actually the importance to engage with the whānau and the family and the importance of that. That's the reason for the intent of this SOP: that where there are circumstances where it's quite clear that there isn't a situation of threat or of risk have they considered that?I particularly want to say that because actually in one of the submissions that came through—this is from the Pasifika Health Alliance—it talked about the number of Māori Pacific and Asian births through abortion. From 1998 to 2018 Māori in particular had 76067 aborted deaths in comparison to all other causes of death for Māori babies—61641. That is a significant amount. For Pasifika it's 39957. That's the reason why in regards to this SOP it's actually giving some due consideration. I don't believe that the example that the Minister gave was actually considerate when it was quite clear that the member Joanne Hayes had clearly stated in her explanatory note there are circumstances where there are actually risk factors that are there that they can be considered under two particular Acts which provide care and responsibility discretion that is available to them and I think that's important.I want to speak about SOP 470. The Minister talked about the fact that there are already safety measures in place for the Health and Disability Commissioner—that's there. I've looked through these regulations and the officials may like to give that information through to the Minister who could then stand up later on tonight and be able to provide that. Because while he said they were already there again I point to the Law Commission who are quite clear: there is no enforcement mechanism that's currently in place; there's nothing there in the provision to ensure that there's an enforcement. And again the safety aspect of what the Minister concerned was sharing about isn't there. I've looked through the regulations. They're very broad they're not specific there's nothing there in particular. If the Minister is quite clear that this is important then what harm is there to include this Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) in the legislation? It just makes it clear it makes it precise that if there are issues where there is a breach of convention in regards to the practices of abortion—I don't think that's too hard to ask for. I want to talk about SOP 479 in my colleague's name Melissa Lee. And the reason I do so—and I'm hoping to take an extension to this Mr Chair—is because I am the current spokesperson for disability for the National Party. So I have a particular interest in this; I've been engaging in the community and I want to share some of their thoughts and their concerns that they have raised around this. Many have turned around and said Well there's nothing to be found here." I know that Louisa Wall has talked about different people that she's talked about but I want to state that there have been 1300 people with Down syndrome and families calling on the Prime Minister to not introduce abortion up to birth. That's part of the 25000 submissions—out of those submissions 91 percent opposed this bill. This is more than just one or two people in the sector; this is a significant number of people who have shared their concerns. I want to highlight some of those concerns that they have shared with me in particular in regards to the current proposed changes of the law. Currently in the current law there is a 20 week gestational time limit for disability selective abortion. The proposed law—the 20 week gestational time limit for disability sex selective abortion would be removed. We're already considerate of the fact that there shall be no discrimination around sex and particularly—I'm not sure—around a gender. But in this case again how difficult is it for us to ensure the safety—but more importantly the concerns raised by the disability community: 1300 signed a submission a letter straight to the Prime Minister. Why? Because of their concerns. And here's how they highlight their concerns. People in the House have talked about facts; here are some of the facts. I know that Jan Logie talked about Finland and other places. Let's talk about a bit closer to home; let's take an example from Victoria in Australia where there is a similar clause allowing for abortion up to birth. There is a reliable data collection of abortions that have taken place between 20 weeks and birth which is reported by the Council of Obstetric and Paediatric Mortality and Morbidity's annual reports.Jan Logie: That's inaccurate.Hon ALFRED NGARO: This is from the report. The member Jan Logie can read it. This data shows that there have been 1685 abortions of babies with disability between 20 weeks and birth since the law has changed there in 2008. These are concerns that are being raised by this community. And again if it is within this community the safety and wellbeing of our community if our disability sector are now—and if parents are—showing their concern then why is it that this House and this current Government are not listening to their concerns?In the UK abortion is available through to birth for disabilities including Down syndrome and in February the BBC reported that a woman had been offered an abortion at 38 weeks gestation. There is now a large movement among the disability community in the UK to get the law changed. Polling shows that a majority of people in the UK feel that disability should not be grounds for abortion at all with only one in three people thinking it is acceptable. Our role and responsibility in this House is to ensure that the laws of this land will ensure that in this House we protect the weak and the vulnerable.In my time that's left I want to just read a couple of comments because there's nothing like actually bringing the voice of our community into this House. We know that over 2500 oral submissions were requested—only over 140. And a number of them actually shared that they would have wanted to be there to share their stories. I share a couple of these stories. Pip Smith mum to Oscar who has Down syndrome: "Oscar is one of four boys along with his other brothers he brings much joy and love to his family and is living life to the full. His life is no less worthy and is just as beautiful as those of his brothers. Our community has repeatedly called on the Government to change the law to ensure it doesn't introduce abortion up to birth. At every stage of the process our concerns have been ignored. The Abortion Legislation Committee made it clear in their final report and they opted to keep this new post - 20 week provision in place in the bill so that it could be used for disability selective abortions." Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.Hon ALFRED NGARO: Madam Chair I'd just like to complete my speech on SOP 479 that I was speaking to. It's in the name of Melissa Lee and in particular it's around clause 12 and it's focused on any disability or possible disability of the unborn child. I just want to read from the explanatory note where it's quite clear that the purpose and the intent of this SOP is in line with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and they note this: "Laws which explicitly allow for abortion on [the] grounds of impairment violate the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Art. 4 5 8). Even if the condition is considered fatal there is still a decision made on the basis of impairment." So that's the intent of this clause here and in particular with SOP 479. I want to finish off with the words of one of our colleagues. I respect that Greg O'Connor in his speech last week actually made these comments. There's nothing like having one of our own who has their own personal experience. He states "I'm the father of an intellectually handicapped son who's now 27 years old and what this post - 20 week legislation will mean is that for parents who do find out that they have a child who may not be 'normal' who [may be a child who] isn't what they had hoped the child would be all of a sudden a whole new set of pressures are going to go on as a result of this legislation." That's at the heart of this SOP 479. It's to take consideration that there would be no discrimination on the grounds of disability. I commend this SOP and support it to the committee."