Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I have two questions for our guests this morning. Deputy Mitchell O'Connor referred to opening the floodgates and that is a genuine fear of people who are probably not prisoners of either extreme in this debate. There is a provision under heads 10 and 11 for an accountability structure to give the Minister an anonymised version of numbers of applications, etc., but there is no role envisaged in the heads for the Houses of the Oireachtas to be informed, consulted or asked for their opinion on this information. Can Dr. Holohan tell me whether there is resistance at any level in his Department to bolstering and enhancing that review mechanism and involving the Houses of the Oireachtas? Section 18 of the Offences against the State Act 1998, for example, provides that the relevant section "ceases to be in operation" on and from a particular date "unless a resolution has been passed by each House of the Oireachtas resolving that that section should continue in operation". Would it not be appropriate, in order to allay the floodgates fear, to put a structured review mechanism into the legislation to ensure its continued operation, particularly in respect of head 4 making provision for termination on the grounds of suicidal intent? I heard the witnesses say that termination is not an appropriate treatment for suicidal intent. I note Dr. Holohan's comments about the numbers which I hope are correct but we do not know. We are fallible so we may get it wrong. Given the fears about the appropriateness of the treatment and the international experience which shows that people in good faith introduced legislation to cover mental health grounds that was subsequently exploited, would such a review not be appropriate? I would like to hear Dr. Holohan's comments on that point.

Article 40.3.3° refers to the equal right to life of the mother and child. Under heads 4 and 6 there is provision for an application for a termination on the grounds of suicidal ideation and under head 6 the pregnant mother is entitled to an appeals process if her original application is not granted. Given that Article 40.3.3° provides for an equal right to life, would it not be an appropriate provision, under either or both heads but particularly head 6, that some authorised officer of the State – I have suggested elsewhere that this might be Dr. Holohan – would be empowered to appeal a decision, also to that body, if the right to a termination was granted because all of this has to tie-in with Article 40.3.3° and the equal right to life? Would consideration be given to that in the final draft of the legislation?