Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have the floor. Thank you, Chairman. I also think that what we strove to do at every single committee hearing was to hear evidence and facts. We have spoken to medical professionals and legal experts. The facts might contradict the narrative put forward by some people but they are the facts, just as the representatives of the Danish Government have sought to put on record the facts. Most Irish women have had the personal experience of travelling to England either with a friend or themselves and given an English address. One could not possibly know how many women travel to England but we know it is in the thousands. We cannot say that Irish women do not have abortions. They do but they just do not have them here. They go abroad for them. One cannot adduce that we have a very low rate of abortion because the facts do not stack up.

The most compelling evidence that I heard was that which was given by the masters of the maternity hospitals, in particular Professor Malone, who to paraphrase him, said the eighth amendment prevents him from providing a full range of health care services. All the evidence we have heard supports the repeal of the eighth amendment and that is Sinn Féin's position. We believe that repeal simpliciteris the best option. It is the simplest option and the one which will create the least amount of uncertainty down the road.

Unfortunately, I was unable to be present for the entire debate as I had to speak in the Chamber. Senator Gavan and others mentioned the people who campaigned in 1983. I mentioned my parents and other very brave people who like them were the subject of quite disgraceful and disgusting intimidation at the time. They predicted all these issues. We can say now that they were right when they predicted the complications that would result from inserting an issue relating to women's health care into the Constitution. Thankfully, we will now have an opportunity to put that right but that will not be for us to decide. It will be for us to decide as an Oireachtas if the question is asked. The committee has made a decision with regard to not retaining the eighth amendment in full. That could mean doing something else with the eighth amendment. If anyone had a compelling argument to make with regard to retaining it or strengthening it then they could have come in and made it. We would have heard it. The simple fact is that any person who has an argument to make in that regard cannot stack it up because if he or she could stack it up he or she would have come in here. We gave every single person a very fair hearing. We heard the evidence and if there is evidence there – I stress "evidence" not opinion – then that could have been brought to us. If there are people outside this room who believe they have evidence for the retention of the eighth amendment – evidence not opinion – then all those people could have come before us. I think they know that their opinion does not stack up and would not stand up to scrutiny. That is why it was easy to blame the committee and to point fingers at us to say that it is biased, which it is clearly not, because a range of views have been expressed by all the members of the committee.

We have the aide-mémoirewhich tells us clearly what we are supposed to do. We are here to assess and review each of the 13 reasons recommended by the Citizens' Assembly and I think we have done that. We have heard evidence and it is a fact that not one medical expert who appeared before us endorses the current system. However one believes it should be changed, it is open to us to have the discussion but we did not hear from any one person who said let us retain the status quo because it is doing a good job. I am talking about medical and legal experts. What we heard was evidence from medical experts and legal experts all of whom support a change and repealing the eighth amendment.

The committee members hold a range of views. I do not think anyone came with a closed mind. We came with an open mind to hear the evidence and on the basis of that we took a democratic decision. One can choose to believe it was pre-empted but it was a democratic decision of the committee that the eighth amendment should not be retained. I thought that was a positive way for us to start. The overwhelming evidence we have heard supports the repeal of the eighth amendment. I have listened with an open mind to all the options discussed but I have not heard any compelling argument in favour of either inserting something else into the Constitution or in any way, shape or form leaving it in the Constitution. Repeal simpliciteris clearly what the experts advise. It is up to the committee to make that decision but I found what we heard from Gerry and Claire from Termination for Medical Reasons very emotional. I have heard some of those stories before and I think it is true to say there was not a dry eye in the House. People were very emotionally affected by their stories. Many of us were moved to really believe that a change must happen. We cannot keep putting families through that time and again. I will close by saying that I look back on the work my parents and their friends did in 1983 when they campaigned. I say to them and all the people who were involved in the campaign that they were right. They foresaw all the difficulties which we as a committee now have an opportunity to put right. We have the opportunity to say to people that they can now have their say. They can hear the evidence and they can have their say with regard to the repeal of the eighth amendment. That is long overdue. Thank you Chairman for the way you chaired the committee. I also thank the secretariat and our legal advisers for the manner in which the committee has conducted its proceedings.