Eamonn Maloney (Dublin South West, Labour) | Oireachtas source

As the Title indicates, the Bill is specific in what it seeks to do, namely, protect the life of any woman who finds her life threatened as a result of pregnancy. It is long overdue legislation which I will support.

During the hearings on the heads of the Bill by the Joint Committee on Health and Children, people on both sides of the argument clearly indicated the legislation will facilitate a small number of pregnant women who find themselves in specific circumstances. That such cases rarely arise is not a reason to refuse to legislate. As lawmakers and human beings, our role is to protect people who find themselves in a position where they require legal protection.

The language used to describe the Bill has been interesting. While I accept that all Deputies are entitled to speak freely and express their views, I have always had a difficulty with the use of the term "pro-life" to describe one side of the argument. I have not met a single Deputy who is not pro-life. No one can take the high ground by appropriating certain language or claiming to care more for other human beings than others. That is not the case. No one has a monopoly in this regard because we are all pro-life.

As I stated during the hearings - this may be a view peculiar to men - pregnant women do not take decisions to terminate a pregnancy lightly. It is not the type of predicament that any woman wants to find herself in and it must be traumatic and emotional for those who experience it. It must be horrific for a woman to become suicidal as a result of an unwanted pregnancy. Legislators must have the courage to take this issue into consideration when making laws and that is what the House is doing.

I have very strong views on another issue which was raised during the hearings. The majority of Irish people believe that the relationship between a pregnant woman and her doctor is special and private. I have had great difficulty throughout my adult life with the idea of legislators interfering in this relationship. It is good that this view was also expressed in many of the contributions made by speakers on both sides of the argument during the hearings.

I am trying to ensure my words are consistent with the contribution I made at the joint committee's hearings. Despite what has been said about this Bill, it is very restrictive. As the Tánaiste noted, some of us hoped it would be broader but we must deal with the here and now. Some of us wanted it to provide for circumstances in which unfortunate women find themselves pregnant following rape and do not want to carry the pregnancy to its full term. This issue needs to be addressed, as do cases involving incest. The Tánaiste also referred to fatal foetal abnormalities, which is an issue about which I have expressed my views previously.

We have heard many contradictions and much hypocrisy during the debate on this Bill, both at the hearings and in this Chamber. Some speakers argued that the Bill, if passed, would open the floodgates as if every pregnant Irish woman would seek to terminate her pregnancy. I cannot understand this view given that the floodgates have been open since the 1960s. Terminations may not have taken place here but for 40 years women have been taking an aeroplane or ferry to other jurisdictions to have terminations carried out. It is disingenuous for people to argue that this Bill will open the floodgates. While we may wish it were otherwise, thousands of Irish women travel abroad every year for terminations. The hypocrisy of legislators referring to floodgates being opened is compounded when one takes into consideration that the law of the land allows people free access to information about abortion and does not prevent women from leaving the jurisdiction to have an abortion. People who speak about floodgates and so forth should be mindful of the existing legal position regarding terminations.

Deputies who were in the House in the early 1980s will remember a document published by the former Deputy, the late Jim Kemmy, who founded the Democratic Socialist Party, of which I was a member. In 1982, the party published a document entitled, An Outline Policy on Women's Rights. Some of those who speak as if they started some great crusade and are speaking up for the women of Ireland kept their heads down when individuals such as Jim Kemmy and the Michael D. Higgins were raising the issue of abortion in the early 1980s. The Democratic Socialist Party opposed indiscriminate abortion but proposed making abortion available where a woman's life was endangered by pregnancy, where a pregnancy had resulted from rape or incest and in the case of fatal foetal abnormalities. This policy was considered barbaric by many when first outlined more than 30 years. In the aftermath of the recent tragedy in Galway, however, it now appears to be reasonable and sensible to the vast majority of public opinion.

The 1983 amendment was, for the pro-life movement, the solution to any future challenge.

The Bill is about achieving a balance that gives due regard to the life, health and well being of women.

During the Oireachtas committee hearings into the heads of the Bill, I listened to a contributor from one of the maternity hospitals. He made an interesting point speaking off the cuff. Sometimes off the cuff one talks more truth than one does when using a prepared speech. He made a comment about the opinion of Irish men regarding the Bill. He said that we have no great record when it comes to the welfare and care of women.

I have listened to some of the contributions from some of the people who would have opposing views to mine, talking about a free vote and conscience, etc. I ask these people, who talk about wrestling with their consciences on this Bill which will protect women in difficult circumstances, where their conscience was during treatment of the women and girls in the Magdalen laundries. Where was their voice during the clerical sexual abuse which went on for 80 or 90 years? They were not to be heard. They talk about telling other people about examining their conscience on this Bill. Perhaps some of the people using the word "conscience" should read the Women's Aid report of two weeks ago about domestic violence in Ireland and they might have very little to say about using their conscience.

I believe the Bill is necessary and well overdue. I stand in solidarity with the very few women who might find themselves in this awful position and I will be supporting the Bill.

See this speech in context