Abortion vote – only a temporary victory - PR9

This was an important victory for the pro-choice movement against the vicious campaigning of the anti-abortionists, who used all the tools they could to mobilise, from the pulpit to the inbox. MPs were bombarded with misleading propaganda about foetal development, premature survivors and pictures of tiny toes.

The House of Commons currently includes a clear majority in favour of current abortion rights and therefore the outcome wasn’t really in doubt, but the experience has been a clear reminder that we must not sit back and assume that these rights are safe in the future.

A relatively small change in the make-up of the Commons, including a Tory majority, could swing the balance the other way and lead to a much more serious threat. The abortion rights campaign was lively and had the active involvement of a lot of younger women and students, and it is crucial that the momentum does not dissipate. As we argued in the last issue of Permanent Revolution, we need to move forward in an offensive struggle to secure better abortion rights, including increased provision and an end to the medical veto over womens’ decisions. The trades unions, most of whom have pro-choice policies, were far too quiet on the issue and need to be brought into a campaign for free abortion on demand.

It is not simply that a Tory majority would reduce the upper time limit – this is called an issue of conscience and therefore MPs are allowed a free vote. But in general there are more Tory anti-choice and more Labour pro-choice MPs. But “in general” is all it is. Three cabinet members – Des Browne, the Defence Secretary, Ruth Kelly, the Transport Secretary, and Paul Murphy, the Welsh Secretary – voted to reduce the time limit for abortion to 12 weeks, a move that would condemn thousands of women to unwanted babies or illegal abortions.

The fact that Labour Party policy has been pro-choice for decades has no effect on these “representatives” who have clearly decided that they are actually accountable to God and the Pope rather than the electorate.

Disgracefully, it is not just the Labour Party that betrays women in this way. Three “lefts” from the Labour Representation Committee – David Drew, David Hamiliton and Bob Wareing – voted to reduce the time limit from 24 weeks.

And George Galloway, of the allegedly left-leaning Respect Renewal, was not mandated to vote in favour of women’s rights and decided to abstain, which can hardly be taken as any kind of statement since he rarely turns up to vote on anything else either. But we know this was not just a lapse. Galloway is clearly opposed to abortion and this is one of the many issues that his socialist supporters have failed to confront him on.

Challenged about this spinelessness, Andy Newman from Socialist Resistance, defended the right of poor old George to take his lead from God rather than his party, saying:

“This issue really is simple. Respect – like all other parties with parliamentary representation – accepts that over matters of religious conscience, that MPs do not have to follow party policy.”

“I cannot understand why some on the left argue that Respect should mandate our MP to vote against his conscience . . .”

Perhaps we should explain to Andy who, presumably, has never needed an abortion. Being able to access safe abortion and contraception is fundamental to all women’s rights, since without them women cannot have control over whether and when to have children, which means whether and when to work, which means whether and when to be active in politics, which means whether and when to leave an abusive domestic situation . . . and so on.

So women need to be able to make that choice. Whether any woman chooses to have an abortion is something that is likely to play on her own conscience. But what has that decision has got to do with George Galloway’s conscience? Nothing – unless you accept that he (and his God) has a right to tell women they cannot decide their own future.

No-one is asking George Galloway, Bob Wareing or Ruth Kelly to have an abortion, but we should demand that as people claiming to stand for women’s rights they vote for free abortion on demand.

Sat 04, October 2008 @ 12:58