Every year in this state, we will introduce a bill until we protect all the babies.
Outside the New South Wales parliament, a movement that once operated at the margins of Australian politics made its ambitions visible: one thousand five hundred people gathered to hear that a single bill banning sex-selective abortion could become the first pro-life legislation passed by any Australian parliament. The moment was less about the narrow measure before the upper house and more about what its architects openly described as a long campaign — bill by bill, seat by seat — to reshape the legal landscape around abortion in Australia. With four Nationals MPs holding the balance and a conscience vote granted across major parties, the outcome rested on a convergence of moral conviction, electoral fear, and the fragile arithmetic of a parliament where no party commands a majority.
- One Nation's Barnaby Joyce told 1,500 activists that politicians' fear of losing seats is a lever — and the crowd in front of him was strong enough to pull it.
- Anti-abortion organizers issued a direct threat: if Nationals MPs don't support the bill, One Nation will run candidates against them in their own seats ahead of the 2027 state election.
- Medical authorities and pro-choice advocates pushed back hard, with the health minister noting there is no evidence sex-selective abortion is even occurring in NSW, and doctors calling the bill predicated on misinformation.
- A counter-protest drew comparisons to the United States, where eight states passed sex-selective abortion bans before Roe v. Wade was overturned — warning that incremental legislation is a proven path to broader restriction.
- The vote hangs on a knife's edge: the suspension of Labor's Penny Sharpe, who had previously marshaled numbers against hostile amendments, has made the upper house outcome genuinely uncertain.
On a Tuesday night outside NSW parliament, Barnaby Joyce addressed roughly 1,500 anti-abortion activists with a message stripped of sentiment: politicians fear losing their seats, and the people before him had the power to make that fear real. The occasion was a rally for a bill introduced by Libertarian upper house member John Ruddick that would criminalize sex-selective abortion — a measure heading toward a tight upper house vote, with four Nationals MPs positioned as the deciding factor.
Organizer Dr Joanna Howe made the stakes explicit. If the Nationals failed to support the bill, One Nation would field candidates against them in their own seats. She told the crowd that passing this legislation would mark the first pro-life bill ever approved by an Australian parliament — and that it would not be the last. Her organization planned to introduce new bills every year, with a ban on late-term abortions already in preparation. "Business has changed," she said, committing to grassroots campaigns in every Nationals-held seat before the March 2027 election.
Joyce framed his support in moral terms while speaking the language of power. He acknowledged the stance would cost votes — "probably lose half the votes every time you do it" — but argued it was simply the right thing to do. He then reminded the crowd that 1,500 people distributing how-to-vote cards could make any politician's electoral arithmetic uncomfortable.
The bill's opponents offered a sharply different account. NSW Health Minister Ryan Park said there was no evidence sex-selective abortion was occurring in the state, and warned that criminalizing any abortion would be an unprecedented intrusion of the criminal code into healthcare. The Royal Australian College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists called the bill predicated on misinformation, noting that relevant prohibitions already existed. Greens health spokesperson Dr Amanda Cohn argued the measure targeted specific cultural and ethnic communities and was driven by racist and anti-immigration rhetoric.
About 150 counter-protesters gathered nearby in Martin Place. Among them was a University of Sydney student originally from the United States, who traced a direct line from sex-selective abortion bans to the 2022 overturning of Roe v. Wade — eight states had passed such bans before that ruling, she noted, each one a step in a longer dismantling of reproductive rights.
The parliamentary arithmetic was fragile. No party held a majority in either house, and Labor, Liberal, and National MPs had all been granted conscience votes. The suspension of Labor's Penny Sharpe — who had introduced the original decriminalization bill and previously held the numbers against hostile amendments — had shifted the calculus in ways that left independent MP Alex Greenwich describing the outcome as genuinely uncertain. The upper house debate was set for Wednesday, with a vote to follow in coming days, and the lower house beyond that still an open question.
On a Tuesday night outside NSW parliament, Barnaby Joyce stood before roughly 1,500 anti-abortion activists and delivered a straightforward political message: politicians fear losing their seats, and the crowd in front of him had the power to make that fear real. Joyce, leading One Nation, had come to rally support for a bill that would criminalize sex-selective abortion—a measure that was about to face a tight vote in the upper house, with four Nationals MPs positioned as the deciding factor.
The bill itself, introduced by Libertarian upper house member John Ruddick, targets a specific form of abortion: terminations chosen on the basis of fetal sex. Yet the framing of the night suggested something broader. Dr Joanna Howe, who organized the rally and invited Joyce, told the crowd that passing this legislation would mark the first pro-life bill ever approved by an Australian parliament. She made the political calculus explicit: if the Nationals did not vote for it, One Nation would field candidates against them in their own seats. The threat was wrapped in a promise. "Barnaby's coming for you," she said.
Joyce's remarks centered on moral conviction dressed in political language. He called the entities at the center of the debate "people," not "foetuses," and acknowledged that taking this stance would cost votes. "Probably lose half the votes every time you do it," he said. "But you know why you do it? Because it's the right thing to do." He then pivoted to the mechanics of power: those 1,500 people could distribute how-to-vote cards. They could campaign. They could make politicians' electoral math uncomfortable.
But the bill's actual scope and the evidence behind it told a different story. NSW Health Minister Ryan Park noted on ABC radio that there was no evidence sex-selective abortion was actually occurring in New South Wales. He expressed concern that criminalizing any abortion would be unprecedented—pulling healthcare into the criminal code. The Royal Australian College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists president, Nisha Khot, called the bill "predicated on misinformation," noting that laws against sex-selection abortion for non-medical reasons already existed. Greens health spokesperson Dr Amanda Cohn went further, arguing the bill targeted specific cultural and ethnic groups and was fueled by racist and anti-immigration rhetoric.
Howe's own words suggested the bill was a tactical opening move. She told the crowd that "business has changed" and that her organization would introduce bills every year until all abortion was restricted. She was already planning to lobby for a ban on late-term abortions. She described Tuesday's rally as her largest pro-life event yet and committed to organizing grassroots campaigns in every Nationals-held seat ahead of the March 2027 state election. The language was explicit: they would unseat "pro-abortion Labor people, pro-abortion Liberal people and pro-abortion Nationals."
A counter-protest of about 150 people gathered nearby in Martin Place. Lucy, a University of Sydney student originally from the United States, drew a direct line to American history. Eight states had introduced sex-selective abortion bans before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade in 2022, she said. "They were able to get away with it in America and then they kept going bill by bill, chipping away at abortion rights, chipping away at freedom, until one day, we woke up and our bodies were apparently no longer ours to control."
The vote itself was precarious. No party held a majority in either house. Labor, Liberal, and National MPs had all been granted conscience votes. But the suspension of Labor minister Penny Sharpe—the MP who had introduced the original decriminalization bill and marshaled the numbers to defeat hostile amendments—had shifted the mathematics. Independent lower house MP Alex Greenwich called it a very close vote and said Sharpe's absence made the outcome uncertain. The bill would be debated in the upper house on Wednesday, with a vote to follow in coming days. If it passed, it would move to the lower house, where the outcome remained genuinely unpredictable.
Citações Notáveis
Probably lose half the votes every time you do it. But you know why you do it? Because it's the right thing to do.— Barnaby Joyce
There is no evidence that sex selection is occurring in NSW, and from my perspective, as I said, it's a conscience bill. I don't want to see abortion back into the criminal code.— NSW Health Minister Ryan Park
They were able to get away with it in America and then they kept going bill by bill, chipping away at abortion rights, until one day, we woke up and our bodies were apparently no longer ours to control.— Lucy, University of Sydney student and counter-protester
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why did Joyce show up to this rally? What does One Nation gain from a sex-selective abortion ban?
One Nation has been surging in the polls. Joyce was there to demonstrate that the party can deliver on moral issues that energize a particular voter base—and to show the Nationals that if they don't fall in line, One Nation will run against them. It's leverage dressed as principle.
But the health minister said there's no evidence this is actually happening in NSW. So what's the bill really about?
That's the question everyone's asking. The medical colleges say it's predicated on misinformation. But Howe made it clear at the rally—this is the first step. She's already planning to push for late-term abortion bans next. The sex-selective framing is narrow enough to seem reasonable, but it opens the door.
The counter-protesters mentioned the US experience. Is that a fair comparison?
Lucy was drawing a direct line: eight American states passed sex-selective bans before Roe fell. Once you criminalize one type of abortion, the infrastructure is there. The next bill becomes easier to pass. That's what worries people who've watched it happen.
What makes this vote so tight?
No party has a majority in either house. Everyone gets a conscience vote. And Penny Sharpe, the Labor minister who originally decriminalized abortion and defeated these exact amendments before, is suspended. Her vote is gone. That's the margin.
Does Joyce actually believe this, or is it pure politics?
Probably both. He spoke about it as a moral issue. But he also told the crowd that politicians fear losing their seats, and that those 1,500 people could make that happen. The conviction and the calculation aren't separate things—they're the same move.
What happens if it passes?
It goes to the lower house, where it's equally uncertain. But if it does pass, Howe has already said they'll be back next year with another bill. This is the beginning of a campaign, not the end of one.