Dr. Simon Mills:

I will deal with the second question first. In my view that is a matter of nuance, to some extent. The question of how the practicalities of it would work will clearly need to be worked out. Ultimately, I am wedded to the idea of two experts. If there is a significant body of opinion that says it should be three experts, there may well be cases where three experts are appropriate. To some extent, it is an intellectual cul-de-sac which tells us nothing about whether we can formulate workable legislation. Of course it is workable; it is more workable in large teaching hospitals where there is a plethora of specialists, sub-specialists and super-specialists than it may be in rural hospitals. It may go back to my reply to an earlier question about how we manage this scenario in the context of limited resources.

In reply to Deputy Mitchell O'Connor, I too have studied this Bill in some detail. I offer it with some trepidation because one does not want to put one's head above the parapet only to have it shot at. I have discussed the Bill with a large number of professional colleagues. Not one of them has identified a loophole in the Bill that would tend to suggest that it would in any way open any floodgates. I am very grateful to the Deputy for having taken to time to read the Bill. The parameters in it should be very clear because they are very tightly drafted. In my view, I do not see any provision through which some tricky lawyer will drive a coach and horses in order to usher in abortion on demand. That is the height of the position, as I see it.