Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome Ms Justice Laffoy, Ms Finegan and Ms Hynes. Ms Justice Laffoy stressed that, in her view, this was a thorough process and she used the term "neutral expert witnesses". I do not understand, however, why the assembly did not set out to consider how the eighth amendment had contributed to abortion rates in Ireland being significantly lower than most countries or the very obvious reality that thousands of lives have been saved as a result of this amendment and the way it has impacted on our legal system. It did not consider that argument. I did not see that in the work of the assembly and I found it disturbing from the beginning.

In respect of the neutrality of expert witnesses, there was no significant analysis of how the legalisation of abortion in other jurisdictions - particularly Britain, our nearest neighbour - has led to the, often unforeseen, widening of availability of abortion. One thinks of what Lord Steel would have put on the record. He was instrumental, as Ms Justice Laffoy will know, in the 1967 legislation in Britain. Would Ms Justice Laffoy reconsider bringing in an abortion provider like the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, BPAS, or an abortion-supporting foundation like the Guttmacher Institute instead of getting a neutral scholar to research the issue? Would she agree that those people might be experts but that they are not neutral? Was it not inevitable that they would sanitise matters, either through their coverage of the issue or through their omissions, in some way? For example, there was no detailed analysis of what happens to an unborn baby in the course of a late-term abortion or, indeed, of the dramatic incidents of incomplete late-term abortions, such as have happened in Britain over the years, where children were simply left to die. I did not find that in the thorough process which Ms Justice Laffoy argues took place. I wonder whether there is a real question about how thorough the assembly was and whether the choice of non-neutral experts, such as an abortion provider and an abortion-supporting foundation, contributed to a certain sanitisation of the issues.

Finally, I found it disturbing to watch members of the assembly asking the most basic of questions at pretty much the last moment - questions in respect of how a late-term abortion is carried out, for example - before then going on to vote for far-reaching recommendations. Surely such a sad and tragic spectacle did not escape Ms Justice Laffoy's notice. Supplementary to that, is she aware of any lobbying, or any attempts within the group, to encourage other members to take a particular view of the facts? I would be grateful for anything she has to report to us on that. I thank her very much for her time here this afternoon.