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

I welcome our witnesses. Since the Government has decided to legislate, that part of the debate is over. However, the debate on whether the Oireachtas supports the legislation is not over. For this reason, we as Oireachtas Members are trying to go through the legislation.

I assume that no Government could present legislation to the Houses if the Attorney General advised that it was unconstitutional. Experts on both sides can make their arguments, but we as Oireachtas Members must assume that, given the fact that the Bill has been presented to the Houses and in light of the Attorney General's role as the Government's legal officer, the legislation is at least constitutional. Subsequently, we can argue in the abstract about the other issues.

Some witnesses have stated that, under this legislation, the intentional destruction of the unborn could occur up until the time of birth. They assert that the Bill will not vindicate the life of the unborn. I am referring to intentional destruction as opposed to the termination of a pregnancy. Is this not at variance with Article 40.3.3° of the Constitution?

The issue of term limits has been mentioned. In this context, we are discussing heads 2 to 4, inclusive, rather than just head 4. Where a pregnant woman beyond a certain term quickly becomes sick, presenting a medical emergency, having a term limit would mean that her life could not be vindicated. Will the witnesses elaborate on these issues?

The broader substance of the matter has been debated and expert witnesses have appeared before the committee. We cannot dismiss the fact that suicide in pregnancy is a real issue. It has happened in rare circumstances and we must be conscious that this fact has been stated at our hearings. While there may be varying opinions on the matter, most witnesses accept that it happens. Whether a termination is a treatment for suicidality is the issue most in dispute.