Senator HARRADINE (2:37 PM) —My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Health and Aged Care. It refers to the recent case of the little baby aborted in the Royal Women's Hospital in Melbourne at 32 weeks gestation due to suspected dwarfism. Do the minister and the government consider it appropriate for Medicare payments to be made for such procedures? Does the government consider suspected dwarfism a valid reason for abortion? Does the minister consider this case might be an example of the necessity for information on the reasons for abortions, the stage of pregnancy and the method of abortion used before the Health Insurance Commission agrees to reimburse such procedures, or will taxpayers' money continue to be provided for abortions almost up to term?

Senator HERRON (Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs) —At present the government supports the general principle that the decision in relation to abortion is for the person concerned and their medical advisers. Given that overall principle, my understanding is that in the provision of Medicare services relating to abortion where the action is legal under the state jurisdictions, it is not the Commonwealth government's place to intervene. Each of us is entitled to a view on that particular issue, and mine is well known. I have been a constant opponent of abortion throughout my life—since medical student days, and I personally would not support the practice that Senator Harradine has outlined. My position has been known, on a personal basis, all my life, and it has not changed. On the government's position, if there is anything further I can add in relation to the question I will go to the health minister to ask further advice and report back to Senator Harradine.

Senator HARRADINE —Madam Deputy President, I ask a supplementary question. We are talking about a matter of major public policy. We are talking about a little child who was aborted almost at term for suspected dwarfism. Is it not a fact that the Health Insurance Commission uses the word `appropriate' when considering whether or not payments will be made through Medicare? I am simply asking the government to tell the Senate whether the abortion of a near-term baby because of suspected dwarfism is appropriate—yes or no?

Senator HERRON (Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs) —In regard to the detail of that and the government's position, I will have to get back to the minister. As I said, I do not personally consider it appropriate, but my view is well known. I will have to respond to Senator Harradine by saying that, if it is a legal act under Victorian state government provisions, it is up to a decision between the person concerned and the doctor involved in that process. Certainly dwarfism—speaking now from a medical point of view—is not in itself a pathological entity which would warrant an abortion, and certainly not a late-term abortion. There is virtually no medical indication—in fact, I doubt if there is one—for a late-term abortion in any case. As Senator Harradine knows, at 32 weeks it is a viable baby. The introduction of abortion in that particular case is untenable.