Dr. David Kenny:

My view is that Mr. Brian Murray was just attempting to inform the citizens of what he believed, and I would agree, was a possible consequence of their action and trying to get across the idea that the courts could either liberalise or restrict access in a judicial determination in future. I agree, as I stated in the paper, that is unlikely as I see it now. The reason it may not be over-complicating but worth dwelling on is simply that judicial intervention in this area has caused such political consternation in, for example, the United States and to a lesser extent in Canada. Judicial intervention in this area has caused significant political controversy and while we are on the topic of debating its future, it is worth bearing that in mind because the choice is open as to trying to control for judicial intervention or not, as the committee sees fit.

On the second question, Deputy Clare Daly is absolutely right. Just as the future Judiciary can change, so too can the future Legislature. I suppose the question is the extent to which we want to place the uncertainty with the courts or with the Legislature and its future composition. Ultimately, almost any regime will require legislative action and will require a responsible Legislature to represent the people and act in a manner that is responsible in light of that. Courts can only do so much and, ultimately, they cannot legislate. There is not a way of avoiding relying on a responsible Legislature in future but, obviously, the choice lies with the committee as to where to place the uncertainty and the doubt.