Ms Justice Mary Laffoy:

The information on how it was done is on the website.

Obviously, I believe the debate was valid. The Deputy mentioned the first four weeks and then going into the fifth week. It is important to emphasise that what the members of the assembly got from the first four weeks, which they were able to utilise in the fifth week, was an informed position. They were brought to an informed position about the law, the medical position and ethics. The objective was to get them to an informed position. I cannot assess how well they were informed or why they came to the outcome they reached but I believe every effort was made to inform them of the issues they were going to have to address in the ballot.

There is an element of speculation in the Deputy's last question. It is not something I have thought about previously. The Deputy asked if the majority went for reason No. 13, no restriction, because they thought the rape or incest reason was too difficult. I do not know if that is the answer but there is no doubt that we provided the information to the citizens. Again, I refer the Deputy to Tom O'Malley's paper, which is very interesting. There are two and a half pages at the end in which he highlights the difficulties relating to rape and incest. The Deputy can draw her inference from that.