Gerry Carroll
West Belfast · People Before Profit Alliance · Northern Ireland
“Yesterday morning, as others did, I stood alongside our resident doctors as they commenced a 24-hour period of industrial action. We often praise our healthcare workers in the House and more generally, saying things such as that they are invaluable and that we wish them well.”
“If we have learnt anything from the political events of the past week, it is that powerful people — powerful men, in particular — and institutions should always be held to maximum account when it comes to abuse, neglect and victims, and that victims and survivors should be believed and supported on every occasion.”
“Agency spend has, again, gone through the roof and is sky-high; locum spend has gone up and continues to go up — it has gone up by in the region of £0·5 billion over the past few years; and, almost every single year out of the past five to 10 years, hundreds of millions of pounds of public money have been pumped into the for-profit privat…”
“With bills increasing month-on-month and year-on-year, that is true, and those workers need a proper settlement that meets their needs and the ever-increasing cost of living. One striking doctor put it to me starkly yesterday. They said that they left Scotland and took a more senior position in the health sector in Belfast.”
“I commend Stephen and his colleagues in the Bill Office and the Executive Office officials, who worked closely with me to try to support, amend or help along my amendments — whatever way you want to look at it. I also want to commend the Member for Fermanagh and South Tyrone who spoke out during the last few stages.”
“I commend people for speaking out on the issue, especially Sharon Burke. I think that she might be in the Gallery. She has been emailing Members on that issue.”
The complete record
Every one of 4,137 lines we hold for Gerry Carroll, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 50 of 83.
“I thank the Minister for giving way. It seems absurd to me, as an MLA who is not on the Executive, that MLAs should support a regulation that will soon be revoked. A new regulation, which I have not seen, has already been drafted. With respect, the Minister is asking us to trust him and support that regulation, but we have not seen it. Does he not agree that that is bizarre and that he or his officials could have laid a regulation at any time? The initial regulation was laid in late December, so why could a new regulation not have been laid in early or mid January, last week or this week?”
“I am very concerned and remain unconvinced that it is a fair or equitable strategy. Of course people should be encouraged to wear masks — I wear mine every time I am in the Chamber unless I am speaking — but those barriers are being put in place for people who already have barriers before them, so I am not happy to support amendment No. 8.”
“The practice and regulations are laden with problems and effectively ask people to prove their disabilities; to seek a GP, which is not always easy; or to seek somebody else. It is a practice that is connected to that idea of welfare reform that does not recognise the real barriers and obstacles that are in place for people with disabilities. It is a fundamental and huge problem, and the Assembly should not support it. <BR /> <BR />Disability Action has been in touch with me and, I believe, others about people with autism, people who are deaf and people with all sorts of disabilities who are fundamentally impacted by this. There were conversations between that organisation and others and the Minister's Department and TEO after the regulations were made, but there are still massive problems with them.”
“According to the answers to my questions, there were no detailed conversations with hospitality workers on how they would be impacted when the change was initially made. There was confusion after that initial change, and, in a matter of weeks, as I said, the change was dropped. I am concerned about how that change was made initially, how it was made again and how confusion reigns among people around how it was implemented. <BR /> <BR />There are massive problems with amendment No. 8 that I have raised in the Health Committee several times. The regulations amend the list of reasonable excuses and put the onus on individuals to prove why they are exempt. Therein lies the problem with the regulations.”
“Amendment No. 21 deals with hospitality. I have said repeatedly that the amendments connected to that have been all over the place. There have been a lot of changes — three, I think, in a matter of weeks — to the regulations connected to it. I said, from day 1, that there was no rhyme or reason for making the initial regulation, which lifted the requirement to be seated in hospitality settings.”
“For a just transition to mean anything, secondary water charges cannot be imposed on people. <BR /> <BR />I support the regulation but sound a warning to any incoming Executive: do not dare touch water charges and do not dare try to charge people again because there will be huge protests on our streets over it.”
“I join others in wishing the Minister a speedy recovery. I will speak briefly. I support the regulation. There was some attempt to rewrite history about what made water charges unpalatable and unpopular. Fundamentally, it was a mass movement of non-payment. Nationalist and unionist parties in the House were initially out of touch with that. <BR /> <BR />Whatever the arithmetics in a new Assembly — if there is to be one at all — any attempt at imposing water charges will again be met with mass resistance, community protest, demonstrations and civil disobedience on the streets like there was several years ago in the South of Ireland. <BR /> <BR />With the cost of living reaching huge levels of crisis, it would be financially cruel to punish people further with water charges.”
“Minister, the cost of living is through the roof. Officially, inflation is at 5%, but the cost of living far exceeds that. There has been a 29% increase in the price of bread. The price of apples is up by 51%, while the price of pasta is up by 141%. Families and individuals struggle to get by as it is. Given that there is nothing in the January monitoring round to alleviate that hit for people and given that he still stands over what are effectively below-inflation pay cuts for workers, what work is the Minister and his Department doing to provide some financial protection for people in these very difficult times?”
“I still do not know why, in the debate about education today and generally, religious organisations still have such a grip on schools to this day. I went to a Catholic grammar school. The teachers were excellent. As I see it, I got a very good education, but it was down to their teaching rather than to the ethos of the school. It was down to the work that was done by the teachers. The ethos of any school should be about education, personal development, teamwork, skills and extracurricular activities such as sport, drama etc — not on showing teenage boys videos on anti-abortion propaganda, among other things. I will support the clauses and the amendments as they come up, but I will leave my comments there for now.”
“We must recognise that teaching or educating in those traditions should not copper-fasten or re-emphasise division but be a way in which to educate, inspire, encourage people to question, and, crucially, allow them to develop their own views about the world, rather than just what they hear internally. Rarely do we hear about efforts to focus on the commonality of history in day-to-day experience. It rarely gets a mention generally, but especially in conversations about education. The other traditions that are referred to here and elsewhere should be front and centre of integrated education. That cannot and must not be a token thing, but something that runs right through the heart of the education system and debates around it. <BR /> <BR />I will not run through how I will vote, because we will be here all night.”
“However, in my view, you cannot use neoliberal arguments to justify integration. Rather than saying that everybody should come together with less, we should say and ensure that people come together for more; a better way forward and better education system for all. <BR /> <BR />A number of Members have referred to the need for cultural diversity in education, and in integrated education specifically. That is important, but it has to go beyond integrated education to avoid cementing the division that exists in this Building and wider society. Reference was made to British and Irish culture being taught in schools. Of course, that already happens in most, if not all, of those schools, as I understand it.”
“<BR /> <BR />With amendment No 2, the Minister proposes to remove a key part of the Bill by removing the reference to socio-economic backgrounds in the criteria. I am not clear on the rationale for that. I was not here for the full debate. Clarity on that is important. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 9 removes the original reference to efficiency, which is a welcome change. This is where the Bill sponsor and I probably diverge. We believe that integration is a good thing because it brings people together and breaks down division, and because, in 2022, segregation is not only wrong but completely baffling. It belongs in the history books. The amendment, obviously, does not make those points, but it talks about the promotion of appreciation of human rights. That is important.”
“If we are to move away from being a society that is entrenched in division and sectarianism, surely one of the key pillars of that endeavour is to do away with the outdated practice that teaches people in separate and divided schools based on religion or perceived religion. The Bill attempts to do that. For that reason, it has my party's broad support, even if there are elements that, we think, could be tweaked or strengthened. Some of the opposition to the Bill is based on parties being happy to keep people apart and separate. If people are brought up and taught together, what place would there be for division and divisive parties with divisive agendas? I have heard comments from Members saying that they are for integration, just not now. As the old adage goes: if not now, when?”
“She needs to ensure that the jobs of the workers who are sitting out are protected and defend Regina Coeli and the service.”
“She needs to take it from the Legion of Mary and ensure that it is run by the Housing Executive.”
“The charges of safety breaches should be thrown in the faces of those who are ploughing ahead with the closure with no regard to the safety or security of women and where they will go if the hostel closes. It is extreme gaslighting of the highest order. They are closing a women-only hostel and forcing people to transfer to mixed accommodation who knows where. <BR /> <BR />We need to see an emergency intervention from the Minister to save the service. It is not good enough to use excuses to stop intervention to save the hostel. How many emergency powers were passed during COVID to protect people from the virus? Where is the urgency and emergency intervention to protect women from the epidemic of violence that they face? Excuses will not cut it. The Minister needs to make sure that the site is kept running.”
“It does not bear thinking about where those women would have ended up if they had not had the care and support provided at Regina Coeli. The workers need to be allowed to continue doing their jobs, as they have done for many years. Many former tenants are furious and have turned up to protest to save the site. <BR /> <BR />The role played by the Legion of Mary and its management board needs to be called out as shocking in this saga. There is not much Christianity in telling women who work in a women's support hostel and those who rely on it that they are out on their ear and the doors are closed. Disgracefully, workers have been suspended on the grounds of serious breaches of safety and security.”
“It sends a message that women's safety is not prioritised despite what was said in the earlier discussion. <BR /> <BR />The workers at Regina Coeli, Unite and everyone who has stood up to defend the service have done the right thing. They will continue to fight and keep the sit-in going until the site is protected and kept open. They have my full support in that fight. I say categorically that this is a vital service that is wanted and needed in our community, and it needs to remain open. It is a safe space for women in a safe location. We cannot put that at risk due to some unexplained reason or with no evidence for those who run the hostel. Over the past number of years, my office has worked with countless women from Regina Coeli who have spoken in glowing terms about the support that they have received.”
“Over the past number of days, I have been proud to stand with the workers of the Regina Coeli women’s hostel in west Belfast as they face the prospect of losing their jobs. This is a vital women-only hostel that supports women with addiction issues or who may have been the victim of domestic abuse. Unfortunately, over recent days and weeks, we have seen why women need safe spaces in our communities. Domestic violence and violence against women are all too common in our society, and the hostels provide an important space for women to seek safety to try to rebuild their lives. What distorted message does it send that one of the only hostels that support women with a dual diagnosis and in such critical situations can be allowed to close?”
“People have been killed at home and on holiday. Women have been killed everywhere. Why is it that I can run at night-time without any fear or worry about my safety? It is because women have been marginalised, stigmatised, oppressed and harassed for too long. Ashling made an impact at such a young age on the pupils whom she taught. Let us make her legacy one that banishes the snake of sexism from this island. My thoughts go out to her and her family.”
“The murder of Ashling Murphy was a brutal, horrendous and deeply disturbing crime. My thoughts go out to Ashling's friends and family, who are grieving and are doing so in such a public way. Words can often seem meaningless in response to such horror, but we have seen on this island in the last few days an upswell of not only sorrow but anger that says, "No more". It says that misogyny should be consigned to the bin and that women should not be subjected to harassment or abuse or be killed. Too many women and other people have too often said this, clearly and strongly: "No more". <BR /> <BR />People have said that Ashling was just running. Indeed she was, but it does not matter where she was or what she was doing; she should not have been killed, especially not in such a callous way.”
“There are rules and actions in place for breaching food safety rules, so why not for workplaces that breach rules on safe, clean air and put people at risk? <BR /> <BR />There has been talk about a pan-nationalist front today. For me, the DUP is deploying the same old tactic: when it is tanking in the polls or its Minister is, rightly, under criticism, it blames the bogey Fenian, the pan-nationalist front or whatever. It is sectarian deflection, and it needs to be called out. I am not part of any imaginary front, but I am happy to support the motion today.”
“Picture that: cases are shooting through the roof, worry and anxiety are at record levels and, rather than using the money to ensure that schools are as safe as is practicable and possible, the Minister has returned money unspent. It is a bit like your house being on fire and chasing away the fire brigade from your door, saying, "We don't need you". <BR /> <BR />It is not good enough that the only options for children are for COVID to rip through classrooms, be stuck in freezing classrooms or have no in-person education at all. In the South, my party has introduced the Workplace Ventilation (Covid-19) Bill, which gives all workers the right to clean air, and the onus is on employers to supply that. If our party can do that, why can the DUP and the Minister not do it?”
“<BR /> <BR />As we have heard, CO2 monitors are not being installed in every school across the North. The Minister has failed again. Despite a record number of cases in schools and in the community, the Minister did not push for a circuit breaker to be implemented in schools before Christmas. There has been no monitoring of long COVID among the thousands of education workers who have been affected by that. The effect has been to let the virus rip at all costs, regardless of the long-term health impact on education workers. <BR /> <BR />As if that were not bad enough, the Minister has returned £40 million of unspent money to the Finance Minister, which could have protected pupils and staff in schools: cataclysmic failure once again.”
“Those steps were not taken. <BR /> <BR />The Minister may say that this is a challenging period, and, no doubt, it is for those on the front line trying to teach and educate while navigating the virus. It is approaching two years since the virus has been on our shores; the Minister, or any Minister, cannot use the excuse of novelty any longer. The truth is that the solutions have been known for some time but they have not been implemented by the Minister or the Executive. One of the main ways to reduce transmission of the virus and protect people's health and in-person teaching is to ensure that there is proper ventilation in school settings. The Minister has failed to do that on a number of fronts. There is no current law to set out a minimum standard for clean air in schools. People are being failed and placed in danger.”
“Schools that were already under pressure because they did not have enough staff before COVID are now feeling that pressure even more as staff develop symptoms and self-isolate. He, alongside many others, has warned about the lack of contingency plans being put in place by the Minister. It is not as if the Minister could not see this coming. In August 2021, the trade union side of the Joint Negotiating Council for the Education Authority told the Minister:”
“To say that the Minister has managed COVID in schools abysmally is putting it mildly. Week after week, we hear about rising cases of COVID in schools, and teachers and workers are isolating as COVID spreads throughout our schools. Pupils have had to withdraw from school and isolate and have lost out on important education and socialising with their peers. The Minister's approach, basically, amounts to continuing as normal — nothing to see here — even though we are in a pandemic and are being told that Governments will do unprecedented things. <BR /> <BR />Graham Gault of the National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT) has also raised a concern about the implementation of contact tracing and staff being in crisis.”
“It is how we will get services on the ground, and it is the only way in which women will once again get Sinn Féin and other MLAs to budge on this issue. The sooner, the better. <BR /> <BR />I will conclude my remarks there. I will oppose clauses 1 and 2 standing part of the Bill. I invite all pro-choice MLAs to do the same.”
“It might clarify Sinn Féin's position for the press, but, for those of us who knew their policy, it is a reiteration of what we are campaigning and fighting against: limitations, barriers, cruel restrictions and heartache. As Michelle O'Neill said to the DUP, we see you. <BR /> <BR />There is nothing moderate, modern or compassionate about Sinn Féin's abortion policy. Being better than the DUP on any rights issue is hardly much of a yardstick. I urge Sinn Féin MLAs to vote against the Bill. One thing that I join Michelle O'Neill in saying is that the demands of the pro-choice movement are stronger than any barriers that Stormont can erect. It has ever been that way. It is how decriminalisation was won. It was how repeal was won.”
“<BR /> <BR />Like Mr Stalford, I was left none the wiser as to how Sinn Féin was going to vote after Michelle O'Neill's intervention, which set out over and over again that we need modern and compassionate healthcare, while implying that Sinn Féin would rather see women on boats than getting access to abortion here in the case of severe fetal abnormality. Telling women that they have to carry a pregnancy with a severe anomaly to full term against their will is state coercion. There is nothing moderate or compassionate about it, nor is there anything compassionate in Sinn Féin's wanting to extend the law from Dublin to here. <BR /> <BR />In reality, that would represent a rollback on rights. It would guarantee that women still have to travel, and it is not human rights-compliant.”
“How low is the DUP's opinion of women that it believes them to be so cruel and careless that they need to be prevented from making decisions about their pregnancy? <BR /> <BR />I agree with Clare Bailey that the DUP is playing politics. It knew last year, when Sinn Féin tabled an amendment that had the same intent as this Bill, that it would be a useful way of exposing Sinn Féin. It has done that, but shame on the DUP for using political games to get one over on Sinn Féin at the expense of women. It is proof, again, of what the DUP thinks of women across the North, especially, in this case, those who are in need.”
“<BR /> <BR />Clare Bailey rightly highlighted the level of myth in the Chamber throughout the debate. She spoke about the rejection of medical fact and the shameful lack of knowledge on the hard realities facing pregnant women who need abortions, especially given the gut-wrenching testimony offered by women who have experienced this. The idea put forward by one MLA that removing access to abortion would reduce pressure on women is incredible. Removing choice and options in healthcare for women is dangerous and backward. As Clare Bailey said, it causes fear. Doing so in order to protect the fetus, regardless of the consequences to the woman carrying the fetus, is cruel and unjust.”
“I reiterate what I said earlier: the Assembly does not send out a message that people with disabilities are not "lesser than" when it comes to PIP, welfare reform and its inaction on the many demands from disabled campaigners. We must not forget the disgraceful way that people with disabilities were treated during the pandemic, never mind the fact that disabled women need abortion, as has been said again and again. Does the DUP's desire to help people with disabilities stop at the need for an abortion? <BR /> <BR />It is remarkable that the Bill sponsor gets more animated about a hashtag on Twitter than the desperate and traumatic impact of restricting abortion. That tells us all that we need to know. For the record, however it happens, I hope that we kill the Bill. If it passes, it would be very dangerous for women across the North.”
“It is something that has been happening for thousands of years, and I think that the first recorded case was in 1550 BC in Egypt, if anybody wants to look into that. <BR /> <BR />Trevor Lunn talked about the work of human rights organisations and said that, initially, he was considering how to vote on the Bill. He stated that, ultimately, he would support the Bill and would not change his mind. I hope that that is an accurate reflection of his position. <BR /> <BR />I will make a few final comments. Throughout the debate, DUP MLAs have said that the message from the Assembly is that people with disabilities are treated as "lesser than".”
“She talked about the lack of services currently and about how abortion being denied or restricted was violence against women. She said that, if the Bill goes through, we will be back on the streets. Unfortunately, that will be the case, if the Bill proceeds. <BR /> <BR />Chris Lyttle outlined his serious issues with the Bill and his opposition to it. <BR /> <BR />Matthew O'Toole indicated his opposition to clauses 1 and 2. He referenced CEDAW, saying that the Bill was not compatible with human rights and that people do not decide to have an abortion or termination in a flippant way. He stated that, often, there are pregnancies that are wanted but meet unexpected complexities, obstacles and unforeseen situations. <BR /> <BR />Jim Allister indicated his support for the Bill. He asked, "What is abortion?".”
“That is inaccurate, and those are the health workers whom she, her party and others clapped, supported and thanked for their work throughout COVID and before that. That myth needs to be dispelled. <BR /> <BR />Sinead McLaughlin talked about the need to allow people space, time and dignity to make decisions and indicated her opposition to the Bill and to clauses 1 and 2. Obviously, she spoke against the main aims of the Bill. <BR /> <BR />Andrew Muir spoke about his opposition to the Bill in that it rolls back rights and said that that was not why he came to the Assembly. <BR /> <BR />Clare Bailey talked about CEDAW and said that people who supported the Bill were a danger to women. She said that the issue of abortion is a private matter for individuals, and I absolutely agree.”
“For me, it is not worth having an all-Ireland policy that tramples over women and exports them to Britain for medical decisions on healthcare. I want to see and be part of a united Ireland that does not put women on boats for basic healthcare procedures. <BR /> <BR />Deborah Erskine talked about standing against disability discrimination. I repeat: the Bill does not do that and is not about that. It erects barriers for disabled women who need access to abortions. <BR /> <BR />Pam Cameron alluded to the fact or suggested, depending on how you interpret it, that there may be or is an agenda by medical professionals to encourage abortions as an option or to force abortions onto people.”
“Paula Bradshaw said that there was a vast range of reasons for opposing the Bill and that the best person to choose to terminate or not is the woman herself. She said that the old law created grave and systemic violations of human rights. I absolutely agree with that. She said that people will be forced to go private and travel for abortions, if the Bill is passed, and she indicated opposition to the Bill. <BR /> <BR />The deputy First Minister or joint First Minister, Michelle O'Neill, stated that women have waited long enough for compassionate healthcare and said that the Bill was a cynical ploy from the DUP. I think that it is cynical, to be frank, to say, "The North is next" but to allow and support or not to oppose legislation that restricts abortion.”
“Civil rights should apply and do apply to women and people who are pregnant.”
“<BR /> <BR />Sinéad Bradley talked about discrimination and her concerns about civil rights. The point that I would make is that the Abortion Rights Campaign said to the Committee that:”
“I agree with the Member. That point was well illustrated in the Committee and, as I said, by Ms Bradshaw's reference to the doctor on that point. A feigned concern has been put forward today about standing up for people with disabilities. <BR /> <BR />The First Minister acts as if there is no choice for women and purposely so. He acts like all women will decide to terminate when they receive a severe fetal diagnosis. He said that opposition to the Bill should not be about his party. The opposition is not solely because of his party, but there is hypocrisy dripping from head to toe when he says that the Bill is about people with disabilities: it is not. The Bill is damaging for all women, especially women with disabilities, and says that you cannot have an abortion here in cases of severe fetal abnormality.”
“<BR /> <BR />The First Minister said that the Bill came from people with disabilities who were looking for support for the Bill. I say this: people with disabilities need abortions as well and want the choice. Some will choose to carry to full term, and some will choose abortion; the choice should be up to them. That is what we have heard throughout the consideration of the Bill. He also repeated the myth that a cleft lip and a club foot are the main reasons for terminations. Ms Bradshaw did a good job of dispelling that myth, and it needed to be dispelled.”
“I will try to respond to some of the comments that were made, although I will not go through everything. <BR /> <BR />The Chair of the Committee said that the Committee had received many submissions during its consultation on the Bill and talked about the fact that full abortion services are not currently available. He said that there had been Executive approval for the provision of services by the Health Minister but that that had not been implemented. He also suggested that the lack of screening and prenatal testing came through as an issue during the Committee's consideration of the Bill. I think that the Chair also said that the Bill would export abortions to Britain and that the evidence shows that. I find it astounding that the Health Committee did not oppose the Bill for all those reasons.”
“The Bill will not prevent abortion in all cases of severe fetal abnormality, but it will export the grief of women who have received devastating news or force them to carry a pregnancy to term. I do not accept that the Bill provides protection for disabled people. On the contrary, it is being used to pit disabled people against people who need abortions in a shameless attempt to satisfy the DUP's desire to see pregnancies carried to full term regardless of the consequences for the person who is pregnant.”
“Those people are not embryos or fetuses; they are people who were born with their own autonomy and they deserve the same human rights as anyone else, including bodily autonomy. We should be clear that, given half a chance, the DUP would block abortion at any stage, severe fetal abnormality or not. We should dispel the assumption that we have any right to tell women what to do with their bodies, that women are inherently frivolous or callous when it comes to making decisions about termination and that those women need to be kept in line by the law. <BR /> <BR />In summary, I oppose the clauses and the wider Bill for three main reasons. I am pro-choice and defend the right to choose.”
“It would take to task the lack of access to services such as speech and language therapy or respite for families, or it would prevent attempts to slash provision of and close special needs schools, such as happened not so long ago in this city. If the Bill were about discrimination against people with disabilities, it would propose to scrap welfare reform and detail a new social security system that values and provides for people properly instead of sending them to food banks. It would set about ending privatisation in our care sector and investing in better care for people who need and deserve it. <BR /> <BR />This Bill is about abortion. Abortion, at any stage, does not threaten people with disabilities.”
“People whose care workers or family members needed to shield themselves were left without an alternative; families caring for disabled children or adult children were abandoned as schools, day centres and respite provision closed without safe provision in place; those who had a care worker who could continue to support them had to find their own PPE; and, of course, disabled people living in care homes, many of whom are younger than the average resident, had to take their chances with the virus. Many families were pushed to breaking point by 24/7 caring without any break for months at a time. <BR /> <BR />The Bill is not about disability in the way that the sponsor hopes to portray. If it were, it would focus on the lack of services, which terrifies new mothers of children with disabilities.”
“<BR /> <BR />Moreover, as I have said in the Chamber before, it is rich beyond comprehension for the DUP to claim to stand up for people with disabilities — a party that is jointly responsible for delivering the personal independence payment (PIP) and welfare reform to the North. In fact, the DUP is the most enthusiastic proponent of it and has blocked mitigations and alleviations from the Executive agenda and supported austerity Budget after austerity Budget. <BR /> <BR />Disabled people and their families were effectively abandoned by the Executive during the pandemic.”
“Clearly, it is even more vital to ensure that people with disabilities are not forced to travel for healthcare that could be much more difficult because of their disability. The DUP's supposed desire to protect people with disabilities clearly stops short of helping them to get reproductive healthcare. We have met pro-choice campaigners with disabilities who have been very clear that barriers exist for them that do not exist for others. The law and, indeed, healthcare should seek to remove barriers, not erect them. Indeed, the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women issued a joint statement in September 2018 pointing out that the restrictions on abortion access often hit disabled women harder than others.”
“In cases of severe fetal abnormality, it might clear the conscience of MLAs who cannot reconcile the right to choose with their desire to coerce women to give birth, but, ultimately, women will still have abortions in cases of severe fetal abnormality. They will be illegal, however. They will still happen, but the women will be hundreds of miles away from home. For those without travel documents, it will result in forced birth. The Bill will not stop abortion; it will just wash MLAs' hands of it. Shame on every MLA and every party voting to wash their hands of women at a time of need. <BR /> <BR />I want to focus on some of the motivation given for clause 1, which is the Bill sponsor's claim that it will protect people with disabilities. First, people with disabilities need abortions too.”