17 July 2007
Media Release

Right To Life Group Disappointed At Appointment

Right To Life New Zealand is disappointed that the Hon.Peter Dunne, leader of United Future voted on 15 June to support the appointment of Dr Rosemary Fenwicke an abortionist to the Abortion Supervisory Committee [ASC].

His vote is highly significant as United Future is promoted as the party that upholds the family as the foundation of a sound society. The unborn child is the weakest and most defenceless member of the human family. At conception the child is endowed by God with an inalienable right to life. The child because of its helplessness is entitled to effective legal protection both before and after birth.

The Minister of Justice moved that Dr R. Fenwicke and Patricia Allen be appointed as members of the Committee and that Professor Linda Holloway be appointed chairman. Mr Copeland moved that Dr Ate Moala, a highly respected Tongan medical practitioner be appointed in preference to Dr Fenwicke. The Hon Peter Dunne voted against this amendment. He subsequently voted to support the Minister’s motion.

We all have a duty to defend life, to promote a culture of life and oppose a culture of death. Dr Rosemary Fenwicke is an abortion certifying consultant, she is also an operating surgeon employed at the Level J abortion facility at the Wellington Hospital. She has been terminating the lives of unborn children since at least 1989. During this period she has probably been personally responsible for killing several thousand innocent and defenceless unborn children.

Dr Fenwicke is a certifying consultant appointed by the ASC, how can she be a member of the Committee that appoints and supervisors her? Her appointment creates an intolerable conflict of interest. Right to Life sought an explanation from the Hon Peter Dunne as to the reasons for his voting on this very important issue. He ignored the conflict of interest and replied;

” The presumption that Parliament has always operated on when making appointments to the ASC is that one of the three appointees will be neutral, one is likely to be “pro-choice, and one is likely to be “pro-life”. In this instance Dr Fenwicke was seen as the “pro-choice “nominee, while as I understand it Dr Moala was a “pro-life” nominee, therefore to replace Dr Fenwicke with Dr Moala would have been to upset the accepted balance of the Committee. I did not think this was warranted....”
Right to Life believes that there is no such convention and is unaware of a Labour led government ever nominating a person acceptable to the pro-life movement to the Committee. It is disappointing that Peter Dunne failed in this critical vote to promote a culture of life and oppose a culture of death.

ends

© Scoop Media