Catherine Noone (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

We are now in public session. I welcome members and viewers watching these proceedings on Oireachtas TV. Before we commence our formal proceedings today, I wish to point out that the Honourable Ms Justice Mary Laffoy, Chairperson of the Citizen's Assembly, has written to me to provide clarification in relation to a recommendation of the assembly in respect of reason 13 regarding no restriction as to reason. Members will recall that this matter was discussed at last week's meeting when it was raised by Deputies Rabbitte and Coppinger. In order to clarify the matter I will now read the letter from Ms Justice Laffoy, dated 11 October 2017, into the record.

Dear Senator Noone,

I refer to an exchange that occurred during the committee hearing last Wednesday, 4 October, about the specific recommendation made by the Assembly in Reason 13 on Ballot 48 on the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution.

I am aware you read the exact percentages of that vote into the record subsequently for clarity. However I am aware that some recent media reports may have engendered some confusion on this issue also. As such, I think it would be of assistance if I reiterated the recommendation of the Assembly in regard to Reason 13.

The precise wording of Reason 13 was ‘no restriction as to reasons’. The recommendation of the Assembly (by a majority of 64%) was that termination of pregnancy with no restriction as to reasons should be lawful here, but this was further qualified by the Members views on gestational limitations or none. In relation to gestational limits, those Members had further expressed their view on the Ballot as to whether termination of pregnancy should be permitted up to 12 weeks gestation only, up to 22 weeks gestation only, or with no restriction as to gestational age. The option which achieved the highest number of votes here wasup to 12 weeks gestation onlywith 48% voting for this option. Accordingly the recommendation of the Assembly for Reason 13 is that termination of pregnancy should be permitted with no restriction as to reasons, but up to 12 weeks gestation only.

According to the resolution approving establishment of the Assembly: "all matters before the Assembly will be determined by a majority of votes of members present and voting, other than the Chairperson who will have a casting vote in the case of an equality of votes".

Full details on the voting arrangements and procedure are provided on pages e825 to e828 of the Report, and the Members of the Committee may wish to familiarise themselves with this note, which was provided to the Members of the Assembly in advance of the meeting in April.

I hope this provides full clarification on the matter.

Yours sincerely,

The Hon. Mary Laffoy

Chairperson

The Citizens' Assembly.

That was for clarification purposes.

Before I introduce our witnesses today, at the request of the broadcasting and recording services, members and visitors are asked to ensure that for the duration of the meeting their mobile phones are turned off completely or switched to aeroplane mode. The gentlemen in our technical department have advised that some phones have been left on, which has caused interference. On behalf of the committee I extend a warm welcome to our witnesses today, who will be addressing international developments in the provision of health care services in the area of termination of pregnancies. We are joined by Dr. Abigail Aiken, assistant professor at the Lyndon B. Johnson, LBJ, School of Public Affairs, Texas, USA and by Dr. Ronald Johnson and Dr. Bela Ganatra, both of whom are from the department of reproductive health and research at the World Health Organization, WHO. They are all very welcome to this afternoon's meeting and I thank them for their attendance.

Before we commence formal proceedings I must advise our witnesses of the situation regarding privilege. By virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to this committee. However, if they are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any person, persons or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable. Members are reminded of the long-standing ruling of the Chair to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I now invite Dr. Aiken to make her presentation.