Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome Mr. O'Gorman and his two colleagues from Amnesty International to the committee.

I thank them for the contribution they have made and for the publication of the report, She is not a criminal: The impact of Ireland's abortion law, and confirm that is a view the party I represent has held throughout my political activism over many years. It is the case that Irish opinion has evolved slowly on many matters, and most especially on the critical focus of the witnesses' address this evening, and is likely to take some little time still to get to a point where, I agree, we need to see the repeal of the eighth amendment. Article 40.3.3° denies the opportunity for women to make an effective choice where they are challenged by real and serious decision-making in their lives on their health, physical or mental well-being, the reality of the backdrop to their pregnancy, such as rape or incest, and where fatal foetal abnormalities have been confirmed and are clearly present. In all of these situations the woman most certainly should have the right to decide in full consultation with trusted medical advisers and support. This is not the case, and despite the good intentions of many regarding the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act, it proved to be deficient when particular cases have presented in the period since.

I mentioned that societally Irish opinion moves slowly. My party has also taken its time in coming to terms with recognising and realising there are circumstances which present and are real and we must face up to this. I speak quite specifically about fatal foetal abnormalities. We only came to a firm decision, by a majority and not unanimously, in March this year at our annual Ard-Fheis, which is our policy formulation vehicle. The time it took frustrated many and others are discommoded by the decision taken. In some way it is reflective of the broad range of opinion which makes up Irish societal opinion today. We made a decision and have given effect to it with regard to opportunities that have presented in the Dáil since. Recently, we supported a Bill proposing the repeal of the eighth amendment. In the context of our policy on this matter we most certainly will support efforts to bring about a repeal.

Deputy Kelleher raised the issue of how the debate is progressed with regard to trying to address the legislation which would follow, because legislation must follow when the Constitution is changed. My sense is the greatest prospect for success would lie in a pre-signalled construction for the legislation which would follow. Leaving it for a debate that would immediately follow, or follow at some point in time subsequently, would leave many people greatly unnerved. If we are to make progress and see repeal of the eighth amendment, we need to be able to spell out for people what it is we as legislators are prepared to present subsequently. This would help enormously in progressing the project for all the good and right reasons, namely, understanding, compassion and the realisation that we cannot, to all intents and purposes, continue to banish women from our shores to access a right that should be theirs here at home. This is the position we hold.

I do not intend to pose a series of questions but I will point to one matter in Ms Zampas's closing remarks on the conclusions and recommendations. I suspect Mr. O'Gorman knows as well as I do that when something new comes into the conversation, the Irish make-up is to say the position has moved. I know about fatal foetal abnormalities because I led the argument and made the proposition. Amnesty's document mentions severe and fatal foetal abnormalities. I know immediately what this use of language will produce, and I ask the witnesses to take on board all of the difficulties many of us have had to get to where we are, never mind where many of us would like to be, believing it to be the correct place to arrive at. I want to be a part of it for all the right and good reasons, none other. The referencing used opens up the matter because where would one make this determination? It would all become another cul-de-sac and I am concerned and worried in this respect. I sincerely thank the witnesses for their contribution to what I have no doubt will be, as it always has been, a very intense debate and discussion which will go on for some time yet.