Les associations de gauche qui militent pour la banalisation de l'avortement se heurtent à une difficulté considérable, il est très difficile de « vendre » un avortement au public habituel des donateurs.
Leur action d'influence ne peut s'appuyer sur une action de masse par le biais du marketing direct car elle risque fort de perdre beaucoup d'argent.
La solution consiste à faire des actions d'influence auprès de pourvoyeurs de fonds publics ou para-publics.
C'est la recette à laquelle fait appel, par exemple, SOS Racisme.
Toutefois, cet échec à entrer en empathie avec la population est révélatrice du fait que ces associations proposent des politiques qui ne sont pas aussi en phase avec ce que pensent les citoyens que les grands médias (comme le Guardian) le prétendent.
A titre de comparaison théorique, je suis frappé par le fait que l'Œuvre des orphelins de la Police recueille à elle seule 15,5 millions d'euros du public pour seulement 0,1 million d'argent public.
Le budget de l'Œuvre des orphelins de la Police.
En d'autres termes, on pourrait avancer que cette association est bien plus représentative de la France que SOS Racisme dont le budget d'un peu plus de 1 million d'euros est pour l'essentiel payé par de l'argent public et par Pierre Bergé.
Abortion law reform plans criticised by women's groups
Charities and health bodies call on equalities minister to intervene and protect rights of women to get impartial advice
A coalition of women's groups has written to the equalities minister, Lynne Featherstone, urging her to intervene in the row over backbenchers' attempts to reform abortion protocols. They say the proposals could delay abortions and allow anti-abortion groups to counsel women.
Featherstone is being asked to seek a guarantee within government that the current system won't change, ahead of a potential vote that could overhaul the existing counselling services for women seeking to terminate a pregnancy
The signatories to the letter include the Fawcett Society, the Women's Health Equalities Consortium, the Medical Women's Federation and the National Assembly of Women as well as the trade union Unison.
It will pile pressure on the Liberal Democrat minister, who has faced criticisms that she has failed to intervene on other coalition policies that Labour claims adversely affected women.
"Preventing abortion providers from offering decision-making support opens the door for organisations opposed in principle to abortion to become formally involved in counselling women on their pregnancy options," the letter says. "Previous governments have always acted on evidence and taken guidance from expert medical professionals. There is no evidence of a need for change in this area and no support from professional clinical organisations for such change."
The intervention comes amid wranglings in government over how to handle an amendment that could be selected when the health bill returns to the Commons next week, which would mean all women seeking abortions would be offered counselling independent of the abortion provider, in a move that could strip charities that provide the services of their current role. It is being proposed by the Tory backbencher Nadine Dorries and Labour's Frank Field and backed by a campaign with links to anti-abortion groups.
On Sunday, the Department of Health said that it would go ahead with plans to introduce independent counselling and consult on how it would work, in a move that was interpreted as caving into the campaign.
After an intervention from No 10 and furious Lib Dems, the government announced it will not support the amendment – though MPs will still get a free vote – with David Cameron and DoH ministers voting against. It also reworded its position on the plans, saying it would consult on the "best" counselling options for women but that the outcome was not a foregone conclusion.
Anne Milton, the public health minister, wrote to coalition MPs yesterday to clarify the government's position and confirm that the health ministers would vote against it.
On Thursday, the Right to Know campaign, which is supporting Dorries's and Field's campaign and is backed by some known anti-abortionists, responded robustly to the government's opposition to the plan. It published a poll of MPs conducted in April, prior to the row over the implications of the move, which found that some 92% backed the statement. "A woman should have a right to impartial advice when considering having an abortion, from a source that has no commercial interest in her decision."
A spokeswoman for the campaign said: "The widespread support for the objectives of this campaign is unsurprising. It is important that conflicts of interest are removed from the provision of abortion counseling.
"We want to see women considering abortion provided with the space to think through their decision. This is not a party political issue. The welfare of women is at stake here.
Yvette Cooper, the shadow equalities minister, said the changing position had left the issue mired in confusion. "There is now complete confusion and chaos in government on abortion. This is what happens when David Cameron pursues short-term headlines without thinking the issues through," she said.
Darinka Aleksic, co-ordinator of the Abortion Rights UK campaign, said: "We need to be clear, these amendments are an attack on women's reproductive rights. If implemented they will limit, rather than expand, the availability of impartial advice and information to women facing unplanned pregnancy. Their aim is to restrict and deter women from accessing abortion services."
Evan Harris, vice-chair of the Liberal Democrat federal policy committee and pro-choice campaigner, said: "Previous governments in this sensitive area have always acted only on the basis of the best advice from expert medical organisations and I will strongly urge the government not to disturb or propose disturbing the existing arrangements for providing unbiased advice until this has demonstrated that there is a problem and persuaded the Royal Colleges or BMA of the case."