Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

The point I am making is that the Minister of the day might have a very different view from that of the current Minister in which case the spirit of this legislation could be slightly undermined in terms of whether the reporting and actions on difficulties would be carried out. There is no obligation on the Minister to take action in the event, for example, that a public facility is out of step with the norms in terms of the number of terminations being carried out. The Minister might not always be Deputy Reilly and other Ministers might have different views. That may need to be reconsidered in the context of giving more comfort to people in the House with concerns about the Bill. I ask the Minister to look at that in the round.

I could go back through the history of this whole issue. Some people have said that the judgment in the X case was flawed and that we are now passing legislation on a flawed judgment. Obviously it is a judgment of the Supreme Court and regardless of whether people like it, it is the judgment. However, reading the judgment with regard to the particular case before it at the time - Mrs. Justice Catherine McGuinness has said this also - it was a very human decision. The court was confronted with a very difficult case and as the Legislature had failed to put any clear legislation in place, it had to make the adjudication. It made the adjudication that a 14-year-old girl who had been raped would commit suicide in the event of her being unable to be allowed travel to England to have a termination. Clearly that is why we are now legislating for the X case itself.

It is very difficult for us to understand the huge trauma facing any individual. Every day many girls find themselves in crisis pregnancies for many reasons and they go to England for a termination. We must also be mindful that we can support people in crisis pregnancies. We need every support available and not only in the context of this legislation. I know the Crisis Pregnancy Agency was set up to give support and some of the faith-based groups also give support. However, we need to do more as a society and a Parliament to support women who are in a crisis pregnancy. In previous times crisis pregnancies could have arisen because the child was being born out of wedlock. That would have been a crisis pregnancy at one time when there were very strong particular religious views in the country and societal constraints. There are now many other reasons why women may go to England.

If we say we do not want a liberal abortion regime in this country, it is our obligation to assist every woman and girl going through a crisis pregnancy to make the decision not to go to England easier and that she can stay at home and be given support. That is an area in which we are inclined to wash our hands. They go to England and we do not discuss it very much. We need to discuss that and see if we can assist girls and women who are in crisis pregnancies which arise in situations which are outside the scope of this legislation.

The other key area that has been raised by many people is that of conscientious objection - not only in the context of parliamentarians having a conscientious objection but also individuals. We all know the right to a conscientious objection is conferred on an individual and cannot be conferred on institutions. However, I wonder whether that should be reconsidered. A particular institution might decide that the only way for someone to get employment in that institution is by having a conscientious objection to carrying out terminations. In effect, almost everyone in that institution would exercise his or her right to a conscientious objection thereby making that institution incapable of dealing with this legislation in terms of carrying out a termination where there is a real and substantial risk to the woman's life. I presume the Minister has considered this, but on my reading of the Bill there is potential for institutions to ensure as many people as possible had a conscientious objection and thereby would not be able to carry out a termination in the context of the Bill. It could limit in certain areas large institutions which may have all the facilities, supports and services in the institution but because there are a few key conscientious objectors the system cannot function as envisaged in the Bill.

I welcome that the Minister has broadened the scope to cover 19 hospitals. Clearly that issue was also raised at the Oireachtas committee hearings. A woman whose life is at immediate and substantial risk for physical reasons would not necessarily present herself to a maternity hospital but her first port of call would be to an emergency department. That issue was raised by obstetricians and clinicians at the Oireachtas committee hearings.

Over the coming weeks I am sure the Minister will listen to the varying views. I am sure many strong views will be expressed in this House by many Deputies. It is important that we hear the view of as many Deputies as possible. I am not saying this in any way to make it political. There are many Fine Gael Deputies who have strong views on the matter. I know the Whip is being applied on its Members, which is its entitlement as a political party and I have no difficulty with that decision. I am not trying to make myself purer than white on this issue. We decided on a free vote for many reasons. Equally we could have taken a partisan approach and opposed the Bill thereby raising the temperature in this Chamber and in broader society. However, I believe this issue is above and beyond that. It has been with us since 1992. The Minister has pointed out that this would not be the seventh Government to fail to legislate. If my party and others made it more difficult for the Minister, this might have ended up being the seventh Government to fail to legislate. It is important that we give space to the Government and society to discuss it. That is broadly welcome.

Some Deputies have raised the issue of term limits and clarity needs to be brought to them. I would not suggest including it in the legislation. However, a large number of people need an explanation regarding the efforts that will be made to save the life of the child in the event of a medical termination taking place. There is a view that we could have abortions up to minutes before birth being due. It seems to be lost in the debate the whole time, but there is an obligation in the Constitution and in this legislation that every effort is made to bring the child into the world alive. However, I believe the Minister needs to explain that more to convince people that this is the case. I heard obstetricians, gynaecologists and others say it is offensive to suggest that they would not do that. People are saying there is no obligation on our obstetricians to make every effort to save the life of the child. It is their duty to do that on a daily basis and they do it in such a way that we can all be proud.

On the broader issue of maternity services, we have had the very tragic case of Savita Halappanavar in Galway. We have had reports and are awaiting a further report from HIQA.

That woman died tragically in hospital because there was a lack of clarity and people were unsure when they could intervene. I am not saying that was the only reason - she died from sepsis - but having read the report, I believe there was certainly a lack of clarity about when clinicians could or should have intervened. The recent report indicated that certainty and clarity are needed in legislation to give confidence to clinicians that they are acting within the law. Equally, we have obligations because of the A, B and C v. Ireland judgment of the European Court of Human Rights to bring clarity to vindicate the constitutional right of a woman to know when she is entitled to a lawful termination in this country to save her life.

I look forward to the debate and I hope we can have a constructive debate. Certainly, I will be tabling amendments in a personal capacity and perhaps on behalf of my party over the course of Committee and Report Stages. I hope that as many people as possible can contribute. The last thing we need is for the debate to be short or cut down to the point where some views may not be expressed and then subsequently to be told that those views were not heard or taken into account. It would be impossible to listen to everyone but we should try to accommodate the middle ground at least on this matter.

See this speech in context