Tolley Anne: Appointments — Abortion Supervisory Committee 
Tolley Anne: Appointments — Abortion Supervisory Committee 
[Volume:639;Page:9922] 
ANNE TOLLEY (National—East Coast) 
: 
 I stand here today to speak to the motion before the House to appoint the new Abortion Supervisory Committee. It is a very difficult thing actually to speak to this motion. It is a difficult issue and a very complex one. I have to say I am quite surprised; I thought there would be much more contentious debate. Perhaps it is a sign of the times—that we have all moved through two decades of changes in attitudes in our society. 
 I have always been in favour of women having the ability to make a choice about what happens to them when they fall pregnant and whether that pregnancy continues. But that has always been tempered with the fact that it is not just their decision and it does not affect just the individual who is pregnant; it can affect whole families and I think—as we are beginning to understand—it can have long-reaching effects on a young woman’s life. 
I note that Professor Fergusson in Christchurch has with his longitudinal study been looking at the effects of abortion on young women—especially on women younger than 21 years. He came to a number of interesting conclusions not the least being that we need more research on the long-term effects of abortion on teenaged girls in particular. In the results that he published he talks about how an abortion for that particular group of women can certainly have an effect on their educational attainments. Of course that can then have a profound effect on the course of their lives thereafter. He states in his report that the analysis “suggests that abortion may mitigate some of the educational disadvantages that have been linked to early pregnancy but that similar benefits are not evident for economic or partnership outcomes.” His report goes on to state: “The discrepancies between these findings and the rhetoric of both pro-life and pro-choice arguments strongly underlines the need for further research into the risks …”. 
I have had in my offices in Gisborne and Whakatane groups of people—mainly women and mainly older women—concerned about the long-term effects of abortion on young New Zealand women and more important concerned about the growing number of repeat abortions for young women. They are having to make that dreadful decision more than once then live with the consequences. 
It is disappointing to see that the statistics for abortion released today again show an increase. In the past 2 years we have seen the numbers increase; they have not been huge increases—400 in a year is not an enormous increase—but they are a reversal of the trend that we were seeing in the years 2003 and 2004. For 2005 and 2006 we have seen the numbers start to increase again. 
When I stood in this House in 2001 the last time that we voted on the Abortion Supervisory Committee I made the point that the great pity for me was that we were not standing in the House debating the reasons why so many—almost 18000—women were having abortions. We were talking about the supervisory committee about the overseeing of that rather than about the causes. It is time we thought about what has reversed that decline in numbers what brings 18000 people to have to terminate a pregnancy and what it is in our communities that drives women to that pretty drastic conclusion. I find it ironic that 6 years later I am still asking the same questions and I do not think this House in the intervening years has actually had a debate on those issues. 
I will be supporting the amendment put forward by Gordon Copeland to this House today but I will not be supporting the amendment from Peter Brown. Should both of those fail I will be supporting the Government’s motion. It is important that we have a supervisory committee in place and it is important that we have a supervisory committee that carries out the requirements of the law. I look forward to this House receiving and discussing reports from this committee about how we can ensure that the law is properly applied. I personally think it is well overdue for that debate to happen. If we have laws in place we must as a Parliament demand that they are adhered to and that the people we put in place to oversee that carry out our instructions. I will not say any more than that other than to reiterate my concern that nearly 18000 women have had to seek terminations in this country in the last 12 months. 
I think it is time we started to grapple with the underlying issues for women in our community that drive them to such a dramatic decision as it is something that has the ability to affect them throughout the next 50-odd years of their lives. On that note I reiterate that I will be supporting Gordon Copeland’s amendment or should that fail the Government’s motion.