Hildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I start by commending the Chairman on the way she has handled these proceedings from the outset. It was very clear to everybody, even before we started, that this was not going to be an easy process. It is not an easy matter to deal with. I take this opportunity to commend the clerk, the secretariat and all the witnesses who came before us. It has been a very worthwhile exercise. We still have much work to do and this ultimately will be a decision of the Irish people. It will not come from this committee. There is a narrative beyond this committee that we are drawing up legislation within this committee but it is not our role to do that. We are to give the Government a clear indication on what to do with the report of the Citizens' Assembly.

At the outset of this committee's deliberations, we discussed what form of constitutional change would be optimal as outlined in the Citizens' Assembly report. One of the options was to insert a wording into the Constitution that would allow the Oireachtas to decide what abortion provision was to be provided. Along with that was another suggestion that the power of the superior courts to intervene and review any subsequent legislation would be curtailed. This would give the Oireachtas exclusive power in the area with no checks and balances by the courts. Many members are on the same page in this regard and I have grave reservations about any such suggestion.

As a general proposition it would be extremely unusual to give exclusive power to the Oireachtas while at the same time removing the power of the courts to review legislation. Judicial review in Ireland originated in the 1922 Constitution. Article 65 stated, "The judicial power of the High Court shall extend to the question of the validity of any law having regard to the provisions of the Constitution." We know that was carried to the current Constitution and the reason for such a provision was to move away from the old British rule of parliamentary sovereignty. In the UK, courts would not review Acts of Parliament as Parliament was supreme. The principle of judicial review had also come to be recognised by the United States Supreme Court in the famous case of Marbury v. Madison; judicial review was adopted as a move away from the British system to a more republican mode of parliamentary democracy. I would be very slow to go back to the days when it was believed Parliament could do no wrong. It would be a bad day for the State and our citizens if we proceeded down that route. It is important to highlight that, as it was a recommendation that came forward. Through our discussions and legal advice, which is often complicated and does not always come down on either side, it is important I explain my reasons for not moving forward with that suggestion.

In regard to decriminalisation, I agree with the proposal that we recommend abortion be decriminalised. We heard evidence that decriminalising abortion does not lead to abortion becoming more widely available and criminalising it serves no purpose other than to threaten to criminalise women and doctors in circumstances where very personal decisions are being made.

In discussions of the case of rape and incest, we had excellent witnesses coming before us. We heard from Mr. Tom O'Malley about the perils of trying to provide some strict criteria around those particular grounds. It would simply be impossible to await the outcome of a criminal investigation or prosecution. With the trauma, it often takes women many years to come forward and say they have been raped. I do not know if such grounds are workable and we must consider such matters when we make our recommendations.

With regard to ancillary recommendations, I was very much struck by the witness evidence regarding what we should do with respect to sex education, sexuality, relationships, sexual health, contraception awareness, advice and affordable access to contraceptives. This committee's substantive views are around the area of abortion. We all agree preventing crisis pregnancies is vital and it is clear our education system is not doing enough in that regard in educating our young people. It is not just about biology but it also concerns relationship advice, dealing with emotions and a holistic approach to sex education, relationships, etc. It is a key part of our work on the ancillary recommendations. Everything comes back to education, and not just for young people. We have heard it applies right across the board. It will be a very important element that we deal with next week.

On repealing the eighth amendment, people need to know there are safeguards. If people are voting "Yes" or "No" to repealing the eighth amendment, it will not be put to the people on its own. They need to see safeguards in place. Publication of legislation in tandem with the referendum process is the way to go. It will be the body of work that we must do next week.