Pro-choice group opposes Stella Creasy's abortion amendment
The amendment would remove criminal penalties for abortion in England and Wales, effectively decriminalising the procedure in all circumstances.
'We are not supporting NC20, and neither are any of the abortion providers in the country,' Ms Clarke told BBC Radio 4's Today programme on Tuesday.
She said a separate proposal, NC1, has the support of more than 50 pro-choice organisations – unlike Creasy's.
'Abortion law is incredibly complex. It governs 250,000 women's healthcare every single year,' she said.
'Because of that, it is essential that any huge change to abortion law is properly considered.
'That means involvement with providers, medical bodies, regulators – and proper debate time in Parliament.'
She warned that MPs are being asked to back a 'generational change' after just three hours of debate next week.
'For us, unfortunately, although we truly believe that we need overwhelming and generational change for abortion law, Stella Creasy's amendment is not the right way to do it,' she said.
The amendment has also been heavily criticised by anti-abortion campaigners, who say it would amount to the most extreme liberalisation of the law since the 1967 Abortion Act.
The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) said NC20 could allow abortions on the basis of a baby's sex and would remove protections that allow abusers who harm unborn children to be prosecuted.
SPUC said the amendment, along with another tabled by MP Tonia Antoniazzi, represents 'the greatest threat to unborn children and their mothers since the Abortion Act'.
They urged supporters to lobby their MPs to vote against both proposals, warning that abortion 'up to birth' could become possible under the changes.
Votes on the amendments are due to take place on June 17 and 18 during the report stage of the Criminal Justice Bill.
Abortion in England and Wales remains a criminal offence.
However a petition has gathered more than 103,653 signatures urging the Government at Westminster to 'remove abortion from criminal law so that no pregnant person can be criminalised for procuring their own abortion'.
It is legal with an authorised provider up to 24 weeks, with very limited circumstances allowing one after this time, such as when the mother's life is at risk or the child would be born with a severe disability.
During a recent Westminster debate, Labour MP Tony Vaughan said it is time to 'abandon these outdated practices' of prosecuting women.
He said: 'I believe that our laws cannot be fixed relics of the past but must reflect social attitudes and societal norms.'
He insisted 'decriminalisation does not mean deregulation' and that he has not seen evidence 'to suggest that removing the criminal law deterrent would then motivate swathes of women to have abortions after 24 weeks'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
6 hours ago
- Spectator
Dan Jarvis is the model of a modern flailing minister
I wonder how No. 10 decides which minister is up for the ritual humiliation of the Today programme each morning. Russian roulette? An elaborate lottery? A competition – last person to spell out 'TOOLMAKER' using alphabetti spaghetti? Either way, today's lucky victim for the airwaves was Home Office minister Dan Jarvis. 'Let's speak to someone who should know what's going on in the Home Office,' began presenter Emma Barnett, ominously. Someone enter the word 'should' into the Mr Universe competition: for here it was doing a lot of heavy lifting. Mr Jarvis made an audible gulp as he was introduced as somebody who knew what he was talking about. Given the Starmer government's propensity for sending out its lower-order goons into acts of broadcasting masochism without proper briefing, it's quite possible that until this moment Mr Jarvis believed himself to be giving a word or two about kittens or sunbeams. As he panicked, Mr Jarvis began throwing words around with gay abandon. He circled round himself, looped over himself and tied himself into a knot. 'The reality is there will be a range of different arrangements… no one thinks hotels are the appropriate setting… the appropriate setting will be a range of different arrangements.' Stock phrase called back to stock phrase in chorused glee. We were basically in Gilbert and Sullivan territory: he was the very model of a modern flailing minister. Despite Mr Jarvis's protestations that actually the government was phasing out hotel use, Emma Barnett pointed out that no alternative to hotels had been found and, as it stood, the practice of just piling people into hotels 'was asylum policy and it's in chaos'. The Minister made a noise like a soul escaping the body. Perhaps it was his dignity making a final, Dunkirk-style evacuation because after this, he launched into the same old 'it's not our fault' spiel. It's this familiar nonsense which we are so used to hearing from government ministers as the fruits of their own incompetence are presented to them, like one might present an uneaten dinner to a stubborn toddler or a recently discovered indoor mess to a recalcitrant pet. 'Do you think you're going to fulfil your election pledge to close asylum hotels?' asked Ms Barnett, in a tone which suggested she knew the answer already. Cue a bizarre directional waffle from Mr Jarvis, everything was going to happen 'up stream', 'in the round', 'at source' and 'at pace'. A sort of Hokey Cokey of incoherence. However it is they decide on who goes out to bat first thing in the morning, I bet Mr Jarvis is praying it won't be him again.
Spectator
8 hours ago
- Spectator
Listen: Labour minister's car crash asylum hotel interview
Dear oh dear. As Steerpike wrote on Tuesday afternoon, asylum seekers will be removed from the Bell Hotel in Essex after Epping Forest district council was granted a temporary injunction by the High Court. The legal action comes after a series of protestors gathered outside the venue after a resident was charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl – and the move sets a significant precedent that could pose problems for the government. On the airwaves to talk about it all this morning was Labour's security minister, Dan Jarvis. But rather than providing clarity, the MP's disastrous interview only threw up more questions… Quizzed on Radio 4's Today programme by Emma Barnett about where migrants would be housed, if not hotels, Jarvis seemed rather confused himself. EB: You still have asylum seekers here looking at the numbers, looking at the difficulty of, as the Prime Minister repeatedly says, smashing the gangs. But what is it going to be? Is it going to be secure detention camps, or is it going to be putting asylum seekers into flats and accommodation? DJ: Well, fundamentally you have to address the problem at source. So you have to stop people coming here. EB: No, no, I accept that. But I'm also, as you are, I'm sure, a realist. And these people are here, there are thousands of them and they are still coming. We know what those numbers are. So what are you going for? If you get rid of hotels, are you going for camps or are you going for flats? DJ: Well, the fundamental point is about speeding up the process of making decisions about people's asylum status. The problem that we've inherited is that the previous government basically stopped making decisions about asylum. The whole focus was on a hugely expensive Rwanda scheme, and that meant that there wasn't appropriate levels of resource going into the asylum processes. So we've shifted the resource that was being wasted on the Rwanda scheme, invested in it, in ensuring that we are now able to take asylum decisions in a much more timely and effective manner. It's still not quite answering the question. Barnett tried again: EB: What are we doing in the meantime? There's some time between now and 2029, which is the goal that you've set yourselves as a government. DJ: This government and the Home Office are absolutely committed to ensuring that we phase out the use of hotels. EB: For the use of what instead? DJ: Other, more appropriate accommodation. EB: What is that, though? Other, more appropriate accommodation? To quote you to yourself. What is it? DJ: The reality is that there's likely to be a range of different arrangements in different parts of the country. EB: What does that mean, though? There's only a few types of accommodation… Could you at least answer, just so specifically, if it's not hotels, as security minister? What is it? DJ: It won't be hotels because of the commitment that we've made, and therefore it will have to be a range of other more appropriate accommodation. Talk about clueless, eh? Listen to the clip here:
BBC News
2 days ago
- BBC News
Ballymena councillor Lawrie Philpott resigns from DUP
A Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) councillor has resigned from the party, saying he wanted to focus "entirely on the needs and concerns of local people" without being influenced by party Philpott was elected as a representative for Ballymena on Mid and East Antrim Borough Council in will now serve as an independent - bringing the number of independent representatives on the council to is the second councillor to leave the DUP on Mid and East Antrim Council since the start of the current term, following David Clarke's departure in January 2024. No influence from 'political agenda' On Monday, Philpott said he had now "left party politics behind to put people first"."This decision has not been an easy one, but I believe it is the right one," he said."My priority has always been - and will always remain - to represent and serve the people of Ballymena to the best of my ability."By stepping away from party politics, I can focus entirely on the needs and concerns of local people, without being influenced by any wider political agenda."Philpott said he was committed to working with other colleagues "regardless of political affiliation" to achieve the best for Ballymena."I will continue to work hard for the people of Ballymena, listening to concerns and doing my best to get things done," he added.A DUP spokesperson said the party had received Philpott's resignation and wished him well.
