Mr. Kevin Kelly:

It might appear that Dr. Mills, Professor Huxtable and I are of different opinions in regard to incrementalism. My contribution is not that incrementalism is not a thing. It is not a thing save for a referendum taking place or the Supreme Court overturning the Fleming judgment. I agree there is a risk of incrementalism if the circumstances in which we currently find ourselves were to change. However, I think that fear is telling us that we fear this is going to happen in ten years anyway so why not provide legislation which allows people to vindicate the right of self-determination at this moment in time. Why are we waiting for someone else in ten years' time to bring it in anyway in a more liberal way when we can do it now in a way that respects our views and society's views on this issue? I do not understand the reason for not wanting to introduce it out of fear that it will result in something and become more slippery or more loose because that means we are accepting that in ten or 15 or 20 years this might happen anyway, and it might happen in a more liberal form than any of us here approves of. Our fear is that it might happen, so let us just not do anything about it. I do not think that is an appropriate observation to have when you can bring it in in a way that for the time being respects the views of the committee on the matter and respects the current Constitution and the Fleming judgment. Are we going to fear the inevitable and just allow people's rights to self-determination and bodily integrity to be disregarded until someone more liberal, in terms of wanting to have a loose regime, comes into power? I do not think that is a fair way of looking at it. I know it is a risk. If we are fearful of it happening in any event, why not bring it in and regulate it in a way that respects our own views on this? I do not see a safeguard as to how we prevent something from being loose in the future. For the same reason, I do not see how we can avoid this from happening anyway. It is inevitable. If our fear is that this might be loosened, we are basically saying “we appreciate this is going to happen.” I do not understand why we would not provide for it now in a way of which we approve, to allow people who are alive now to end their suffering.