Diane Abbott Accuses Government Of Pressing Ahead With Abortion Plans

Diane Abbott

PA/The Huffington Post UK   First Posted: 26/01/2012 12:58 Updated: 26/01/2012 15:03

The government has been accused of pushing ahead with plans to strip abortion providers of their role in counselling women despite an amendment on the issue suffering a heavy defeat in the Commons last year.

Shadow public health minister Diane Abbott said she had walked out of a new cross-party abortion group set up by the government to look at the issue of counselling following the defeat.

She accused the government of "ploughing ahead" with the controversial abortion changes, saying the new group was a "front" for pushing through the plans which were "unwanted, undemocratic and unsubstantiated with evidence".

The British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS) also expressed dismay at what it sees as aims to implement the changes anyway.

In September MPs have voted against proposals to change the law governing advice given to women seeking abortion.

Conservative MP Nadine Dorries had tabled an amendment to the Health and Social Care Bill that would have banned organisations that carry out abortions, such as Marie Stopes, from offering counselling.

Dorries has argued that because they receive money for carrying out terminations, the organisations have a vested interest.

Critics of the Mid Bedfordshire MPs amendment warned that it would open up the way for religious groups with an anti-abortion agenda to get involved.

MPs were given a "free vote" on the amendment on Wednesday. They voted against change by 118 to 368 - a majority of 250 votes.

But despite the defeat Dorries claimed victory. She told the BBC that a "massive spotlight" had been shone on the abortion "industry".

"It has been a most tremendous success. We've lost the battle but we've won the war," she said.

Public health minister Anne Milton said just before the vote that the government would try to implement the spirit of Dorries' proposal without the need for legislation.

She said: "The government supports the spirit of the amendments, and we intend to present proposals for regulations after consultation."

The cross-party group has now been meeting to discuss three proposals, which could include stripping providers of their current role, to form part of this consultation.

The cross-party group includes Milton and Dorries.

Abbott, who voted against the amendment in the Commons, said the government still intended to strip providers of their roles.

In a letter to Milton, she said: "I entered into the meetings in good faith.

"I was genuinely interested in improving the quality of counselling available to women.

"But I now believe the 'consultation' will be a front for driving through the anti-choice lobbyists' preferred option without legislation or a debate on the floor of the House."

She added: "There is no doubt which option the government wants to drive through. There will be no legislation or debate in Parliament.

"These changes are unwanted, undemocratic and unsubstantiated with evidence.

"I think women and families across the country will be as horrified as I am by the way the government is trying to turn the clocks back.

"The talks that have taken place have been little more than window dressing for what is an aggressive, anti-choice campaign and I am walking away from them.

"It's a group of 'Tea Party Tories' who are determined to plough ahead, despite these policies being decisively rejected by Parliament, by the medical profession and also by the British public.

"I think we need to fight back against these policies.

"Women in this country want to have choice over their fertility and that is a basic human right."

Dorries has claimed the real reason Abbott was leaving the committee "could be because she hasn't got a clue what is going on!"

Critics of the existing system say clinics currently offer biased information, because their funding from the Government depends on the number of terminations they carry out.

Pro-life campaigners believe introducing independent counselling could reduce the number of abortions.

BPAS and others say changing the way counselling is provided would be damaging to women.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST UK POLITICS

The government has been accused of pushing ahead with plans to strip abortion providers of their role in counselling women despite an amendment on the issue suffering a heavy defeat in the Commons las...
The government has been accused of pushing ahead with plans to strip abortion providers of their role in counselling women despite an amendment on the issue suffering a heavy defeat in the Commons las...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 33
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
02:39 PM on 01/27/2012
Diane Abbott walked out of a new cross-party abortion group to look at the issue of counselling.

Did walking out help?
12:41 PM on 01/29/2012
Yes, it shines the spotlight on a undemocratic agenda, which was also publicised nationwide.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jacksdad41
Quant Je Puis
10:57 AM on 01/27/2012
I think it only right the decision is personal to the woman - it is her body and for a miriad of reasons she will decide what is right for her with advice form whomesoever she seeks it. In a slight contrast I am mindful of a comment by a consultant who offered the following "it is a bizzare situation when on the 2nd floor of my maternity unit I am aborting babies at up to 26 weeks, 2 floors above my doctors are trying to save babies born prematurely at 26 weeks" the earliest premature baby has just gone home having been delivered at 22 weeks. The reasons for abortion are many, but no-one has the right to prevent a woman doing what she believes is in her best interest for her personal reasons and as a man I feel it not appropriate to even air my personal views.
05:50 PM on 01/27/2012
jacksdad - A Swiss or Dutch doctor could equally say " Here I am trying to save lives " and " down the road doctors are taking lives " - euthanasia and abortion are both choices under the laws of their countries - and 24 weeks is the limit NOT 26 - the number carried out over 20 weks is less than 1% of all terminations and are for serious medical conditions which threaten the potential mother
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jacksdad41
Quant Je Puis
06:39 PM on 01/27/2012
Apologies,I read my source incorrectly re; the 26 weeks.
The current policy framework for the abortion service emphasises the importance of women
being able to access abortion, particularly early on in pregnancy, and funding has increased
accordingly. Since 2003, there has been a relative increase in abortions at gestations below
10 weeks compared with those that take place later in the first trimester. However, these
developments have not significantly reduced demand for abortions in the second trimester,
which account for approximately 11 percent of all abortions, with 1.4 percent of all abortions
occurring after 20 weeks. I can find no mention of "serious medical conditions" being a factor either to mother or foetus.
I was not aware "euthanasia" was legal anywhere in the world unless voluntary.
10:38 PM on 01/26/2012
I wish politicians would stop telling us how to run our lives. Most of them are ill-qualified to do so. Their job is to create the conditions where we can make a life, which they are manifestly failing to do.
10:17 PM on 01/26/2012
Mrs Dorries has her own agenda - to legally ban abortion - this is merely a tactic to move forward her strategy - she does not accept th right of women to chose - she knows what is best for them and that's an end to the matter as far as she is concerned - she is best ignored - abortion is and should remain the private personal choice of women
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Thismortalcoil
Science is the poetry of reality
05:34 PM on 01/26/2012
A study was recently carried out where experts examined data from 27 EU states and they found that those who carry out abortion on request actually have slightly fewer abortions than those who only allow them on certain conditions.

On request countries have an abortion rate of 11 per 1,000 women.

Countries, like the UK, that restrict access have a rate of 12.3 per 1,000 women.

Countries with liberal attitudes towards sex education and abortion not only have less abortions, they have less teen pregnancies and less STDs.

These are all facts that Dorries finds it convenient to ignore. If she wants to reduce the number of abortions, the easiest way to achieve that is to invest in sex education from an early age.

And that doesn't mean the ridiculous notion of abstinence which has been shown to be such a massive failure that it is astounding that people can still bang on about it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
deluk
disgusted.
10:14 PM on 01/26/2012
How does the UK "restrict access"?...and virtually nobody in the UK bangs on about abstinence, the words never mentioned, or at least I've never heard it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Thismortalcoil
Science is the poetry of reality
10:51 AM on 01/27/2012
Hi deluk,
I think Dorries is careful not to use the word abstinence, she preaches that girls should 'say no,' which is of course exactly the same thing.

In the UK, abortions are only allowed on certain grounds, including that continuing with the pregnancy would be a greater risk to the woman's life, physical or mental health than ending the pregnancy, continuing would be more of a risk to the physical or mental health of any of the woman's existing children and there is a real risk the child would have a serious physical or mental disability.

In many, more liberal, EU member states, terminations can be performed in early pregnancy on request, so the woman doesn't have to explain all the reasons why she wants one. It is taken as red that if she wants one then she must have a good reason.
04:21 PM on 01/26/2012
Is this how representative democracy works in Tory-Democrat Britain; don't get the answer you want via the legislative process? Well then, why not fly under the radar and seek to impose you horrid, ill-informed view on everyone else without the need for democratic oversight. Otherwise known as dictatorship.

Boo sucks to Nadine and the equally odious Milton.
01:38 PM on 02/09/2012
Isn't that how Government's have worked for many years??
01:53 PM on 02/09/2012
Perhaps. But it's a pretty vile mode of governance either way. It's olicratic not democratic. We don't confer the title of MP on these people so that they can impose their view on us through executive orders in the shadows. We elect them to represent our interests and represent our views as a whole. This is best served via the legislative process, the executive process is for the insignificant minutia of running state machinery. Not something as wide reaching as this.
04:05 PM on 01/26/2012
Conservative MP Nadine Dorries, far right, religious apologist and crusader, she really seems a little obsessed with what women do with their reproductive organs, does she take lessons from Mitt Romney?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Thismortalcoil
Science is the poetry of reality
03:22 PM on 01/26/2012
Dorries doesn't want 'independant counselling' she wants far right Christian scaremongering.

She'd be showing vulnerable women images of late-term abortions (which are only carried out in extreme medical circumstances) and ignoring the fact that the vast majority abortions are just a tiny, unrecognisable blob of cells.

Religion has no part to play in questions of government or healthcare.
04:02 PM on 01/26/2012
"Religion has no part to play in questions of government or healthcare­"

But it doesn't stop them trying....again and again and again.
02:40 PM on 01/26/2012
Probably being pushed by white people - they're all like that.
04:41 PM on 01/26/2012
What a crass genera... Oh wait! I see what you're doing.~ :-p
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DINGCHIROPTERA
02:24 PM on 01/26/2012
NO ONE should be telling a woman what to do with her body. What should be provided is an unbiased, objective look at the woman's choices. Religion should not even come into the conversation. Why do hard core Christians believe that everyone should follow their rules? And who are they to tell an individual that their beliefs are wrong? If you ask me, the pro-lifer's are the least Christian of the lot. They apparently want all of us women pregnant and bare foot in the kitchen.
04:01 PM on 01/26/2012
I agree 100% but just remember that 50% of the aborted babies are likely to be women in a very tiny version. You have clearly no idea of Christianity other than what you think you know. You appear to be speaking more about Islam (now lets see how long this comment lasts)
04:46 PM on 01/26/2012
"women in a very tiny version" or more likely a cluster of undifferentiated cells (with all the inherent qualities of a salted slug) or a lump of barely functional tissue devoid of many of the base characteristics of a living creature (such as a functioning CNS).
05:36 PM on 01/26/2012
BMC.. if your version of Christains don't your children aborted, you don't have to abort them... it's your right to chose.. the question is, do you have the right to chose for others
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:55 PM on 01/26/2012
So what is the difference with this Government pushing ahead and the last New Labour Government.
Is she trying to "Divide. In the above article this line is classic "Diane Abbott said she had walked out of a new cross-party abortion group " to answer her phone as Ed Miliband was calling her. ( reference to the famous Sky interview where she walk away during an interview to answer her phone and did not come back)
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/01/05/diane-abbott-racist-tweet-sky-news-interview_n_1185647.html?show_comment_id=127015126#comment_127015126
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:41 PM on 01/26/2012
Divide and rule, I thought Diane Abbott was not allowed to be in public without Ed Miliband's permission. I like this line "Diane Abbott said she had walked out of a new cross-party abortion group set up by the government to " Speak to Ed Miliband on her phone..... or to speak to Sky reporters.