Mary Seery Kearney (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses. This has been a fruitful conversation. My reflection on the poll is, while I agree with the sentiment of the outcome as published, I thought the questions were simplistic. They did not reflect the depth necessary so I have caution with regard to that poll.

My quick mopping up is that, with due respect, I utterly reject the characterisation of raising incrementalism. as fearmongering. There is no intention on my part to do that. It is a legitimate conversation to have. Ultimately, we will be presented with a choice of who comes within the criteria and who does not. We have to consider where the law in other countries has moved to, and whether taking that on board is worthy of us. We will do that in the international module. It is important that we discuss and consider it and consider the limitations on how we reflect the current mores of our society. I also object to any characterisation that raising it indicates, or may be deduced as indicating, that I am afraid of legislating; I am not. I take my job as legislator very seriously. I believe in a just society we should legislate for even that small minority who may wish to avail of this. However, in doing so, by default we will end up doing what Senator Ruane brought to the table so incredibly eloquently. We are going to be making decisions on value of life, and the implications of value of life, and how that happens. I am mindful that whatever we do will have the presumption of constitutionality. What we are doing is serious and, therefore, it is important we look at the passage of how things have changed in the countries therein. I will go back over the transcript but Dr. Mills, in particular, has given us a lot of frameworks and pieces to work with, which will help us find those boundaries for ourselves, and how to set them in this legislation. There is no question. I just needed to respond to what had been said previously.