Abortion access
In my article "How and why abortion access is limited" (GLW #460), the prospect of Tasmanian health minister Judy Jackson investigating the possibility of public funding for a new abortion clinic was hailed as "a significant victory for Tasmanian women". This was premature, at best.
While I understand unofficially that consideration is being given to this, it is not at all clear what the outcome will be. Since the publication of the article, I have received a letter from Jackson stating that "members of staff at the Royal Hobart Hospital and the Women's Health Unit within the Division of Health Advancement are currently considering options to cope with this increased demand [for abortion services since the closure of the private clinic at Moonah]", and that the government's "position is that it will continue to provide the services through the public hospitals within the prevailing constraints".
The "prevailing constraints" within which abortions are provided in state hospitals include a neo-liberal economic framework that promotes "fiscal responsibility", not to expanding public funding for necessary services (unless at the expense of other services); the existence of legal restrictions on abortion; and a lack of will to ensure the recruitment and training of medical students and doctors willing to perform pregnancy termination, and of other staff willing to participate in the service.
Unless these "constraints" are addressed, abortion services will continue to be inadequate. Meanwhile, around 200 women travel interstate each year to access abortions they are unable to obtain in Tasmania, and an unknown number have children they didn't want.
Kamala Emanuel
North Hobart
@letter =
Cuba and gay rights
Cuba solidarity activists, including members of the Australian Cuba Friendship Society and the Democratic Socialist Party gathered at the Dendy cinema in Newtown, Sydney, on August 21 to object to an Amnesty International fundraiser screening of a film by Julian Schnabel, When Night Falls.
Amnesty advertised the film as a "devastating indictment of the intolerance of the Castro regime for [emigre Cuban gay novelist Reinaldo] Arenas' sexuality and creativity". From this description of the film, Amnesty could be perceived as misleading the public into the belief that gay rights in contemporary Cuba are not respected.
There was no mention in the promotion of the film that in 1979, Cuba was one of the first countries in Latin America to decriminalise homosexuality. Amnesty did not reveal that homophobia is actively challenged in Cuban society by way of widespread sexual education in Cuba's educational institutions and by open participation in public life by gay people. One of the events demonstrating this was the 1995 annual May Day procession of more than one million people which was led by Cuban gays
Why did Amnesty International not choose to screen Gay Cuba by US director Sonja de Vries, which openly and honestly examines Cuba's gay rights record and its gains over the last 10 years? This documentary contains footage and interviews with gays and lesbians who point out frankly the negative aspects that existed previously in Cuba, as well as the positive advances which have taken place more recently. Why didn't Amnesty International screen the Cuban government-sponsored film Strawberry and Chocolate, which criticises Cuba's past intolerance of homosexuality but addresses the changes that have been welcomed by the gay community and Cubans in general?
Noreen Navin
Sydney
NT election coverage
The article on the Northern Territory elections in GLW #461 by Ruth Ratcliffe is a vintage piece of "Third Period" hubris. The extraordinary headline "Socialist Alliance does well in NT poll" says it all. The thrust of the article pushes the DSP's consistent mantra — the Socialist Alliance versus a Labor/Liberal coalition. This political line is ultraleft madness anywhere in Australia, but in the NT it is the most grotesque of all possible political absurdities.
The socio-cultural lines of division in the NT are clearly and bitterly drawn, in fact, over a number of generations. On the one side are the rabid, thoroughly racist, CLP, and, on the other side, the Territory Labor Party, which has the overwhelming support and, to some extent, the involvement, of the trade union movement and the indigenous community, as well as people of migrant origin, who are a significant force in the NT.
A GLW headline about the NT elections ought to have been something like, "Bitterly fought election, Liberals defeated, Labor elected, bye bye mandatory sentencing, Socialist Alliance does well". The article should have included the assertion that the Socialist Alliance will continue its several agitations, and demand that the labour movement press the Labor government for the adoption of progressive policies. The tasks in the Northern Territory are a small but important model of the strategic tasks that will face socialists after the coming federal election.
Bob Gould
Newtown NSW {Abridged]
[Editor's note: The closing news date for GLW #461 was August 19. At the close of counting on August 18, it was still uncertain whether the ALP would win enough seats to replace the CLP as the governing party in the Northern Territory.]
@letter =