Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

1. To delete all words after “That” and substitute the following:

“Dáil Éireann declines to give the Bill a second reading in order that the Citizens’ Assembly, established by Resolutions of Dáil Éireann and Seanad Éireann, can conclude its deliberations on the Eighth Amendment which is the subject matter of this Bill, and report to the Oireachtas in the first half of 2017.”.

Rather than the other side of the House telling me what I think on this issue, they might please allow me to outline what it is I think on it. The Government gave a clear commitment on how it intended to examine the complex and important issue of the eighth amendment. Since our last debate on this issue in July that commitment has been advanced. The Citizens’ Assembly has now become a reality and has held its first meeting. It will deal with the eighth amendment as its first piece of work and it, independently of this House, has declared its intention to report in the first half of next year. This morning, the Government confirmed that a special Oireachtas committee will be asked to respond to its recommendations within six months.

I concluded my contribution during the last debate on this issue by speaking as one of a generation who has never had an opportunity to vote on this issue. I begin tonight in that same place. Like all others who have never had their say, I want mine. However, I refuse to pretend it is as simple as those proposing this Bill present it. I realise, as keenly as anyone else, the long and complex history of abortion debate in this country.

It is now more than 30 years since the eighth amendment was enacted following a bitter and divisive political debate and amid controversy about the meaning and effect of the new constitutional provision. It is 20 years since the Supreme Court confronted the issue in the urgent circumstances of the X case and it is four years since the tragic death of Savita Halappanavar. It is just three years since the last Government, of which I was proud to be a member, finally addressed the generational neglect of the Supreme Court ruling by passing the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act to give it effect. Despite the limited nature of that legislation, remember how it divided this House, political parties and people. Remember the differing points of view and the difficult, but important, discussions that it entailed.

Then, as now, this country, and this House, are bound by the Constitution. A referendum was held in 1983 and, regardless of one’s views, and I certainly have views, resulted in the adoption of a provision which became Article 40.3.3° of the Constitution and which is now commonly known as the eighth amendment. As the House is aware, Article 40.3.3° provides, “The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right.” The Private Member’s Bill before the House this evening provides for a referendum to delete the eighth amendment to the Constitution.

Proposing a Bill to amend the Constitution is the easy part. Telling the people what would replace that constitutional amendment in law or elsewhere is the difficult work we now must do. As the proponents of this Bill well know, and as I know, to hold a referendum one must do one's homework and one must properly engage with and inform the Irish people. We saw it with the children’s referendum and the important marriage equality referendum. It cannot be ignored that there are significant policy and legal issues involved in changing the eighth amendment. Simply deleting it opens up major questions for our existing laws and the future legislative framework which would apply. There are important questions that must be answered before proposing an amendment to the Constitution. Simply deleting it raises significant implications for medical practice and the ethical codes of professional regulatory bodies. Simply deleting it takes no account of the differences of opinion in society, and it will be the will of the people that decides this issue.

There are those who believe that the X case was wrongly decided and that there should be another referendum to row back on the right to an abortion in the case of suicide. However, two referendums which tried to remove suicide as a ground were held in 1992 and 2002 and were defeated. Recent public debate has indicated public support for termination of pregnancies in cases of rape, incest or fatal foetal abnormality. However, other groups, as is their right, would like to see much broader grounds for termination. Therefore, let us not pretend this is simple. This is a complex debate.

As Minister for Health, I understand that the inclusion of the eighth amendment in our Constitution has caused much hardship and uncertainty for women who experience a crisis pregnancy and for our health care professionals who provide a clinical service to them, and I am not satisfied with this situation. Our last debate in this House on the issue of abortion was on foot of legislative proposals by Deputy Mick Wallace on the issue of fatal foetal abnormalities. While I was not able to support that legislation because of the constitutional reality, as we listened to the stories of women who received a diagnosis of fatal foetal abnormality, and I met them again only last week, we know that the current constitutional and statute law causes added distress to them and their families, who are already distraught. I would like to change this situation as soon as possible, but we have to provide the public with comprehensive information about the legal and policy changes that would follow upon a change to the Constitution. Clearly, if this Bill were to pass here tonight, it would do so both in a policy and legal vacuum.

For these reasons I would ask that we in this House, who only just set it up, give the Citizens' Assembly the time it needs to consider the issues and report back to the Oireachtas in the first half of next year. The establishment and the terms of reference of the assembly were approved by a resolution of both Houses of the Oireachtas only in July. The assembly is required to consider the eighth amendment of the Constitution and report its recommendations on the matter to the Oireachtas, as I have stated, in the first half of 2017. Ms Justice Mary Laffoy, a justice of the Supreme Court, is chairing the assembly, which comprises 99 citizens randomly chosen from the population. The first meeting of the assembly took place in Dublin Castle on 15 October and a list of dates has already been agreed to discuss the eighth amendment over the next number of months.

I thank the women and men who, on our behalf, are undertaking this mammoth task. It is a true example of civic service and they do have the gratitude and support of many. The assembly’s recommendations will be acted upon by a special Oireachtas committee which will be asked to report in six months. The Government is today asking the Business Committee of the Oireachtas to lay the preparatory groundwork for this committee so that it can begin its work without delay.

I know that the time this will take is too long as far as some people both inside and outside of the House are concerned but, just as the last Government addressed the Supreme Court judgment in theX case after 20 years of neglect and avoidance by politicians on all sides of this House, the current Government will address the issue of the eighth amendment. However, we want to do so in the best way. We must do the preparatory work to properly inform debate, to facilitate considered and respectful dialogue and to try to build, in so far as is possible, consensus across Irish society on an issue that has divided society for decades. I believe truly that the Citizens’ Assembly is the forum in which to do it, that it is the best way to do it and that it will do the people a great service in examining all of the complex issues involved. Deputy Ruth Coppinger referenced the marriage equality referendum. We saw the role the constitutional convention played in informing public debate, putting information into the public domain and teasing out issues. We saw a referendum on foot of it and we know how happy all of us were to see that referendum pass.

Although I cannot support the Bill before us this evening, I welcome the opportunity to debate this again. It is important that we debate it. No one is trying to silence debate, as I heard others state earlier today. In particular, I genuinely do welcome the changed tone that has been noticeable in our discussions, even in the past three years. We have to discuss the issue and address it. I would like to especially pay tribute to those who have come forward and told their very personal stories. Those stories have shaped my personal views and remind us all of how real people experience our laws and their effect on medical practice.

I wish I could tell them we could solve this tomorrow but I know that simply is not true. I recognise that colleagues on all sides of this House come to the debate with deeply held principles. I accept their bona fides and hope they accept mine.

For my part, I cannot and will not do women of Ireland the disservice of pretending that this question can be answered with one word, three words or one Bill. It is on this basis that the Government brought forward its reasoned amendment in order that the Citizens' Assembly established by this House and the Upper House in July can conclude its deliberations and make its recommendations and that the Oireachtas committee can act upon those recommendations. We have proved that we will address the issues that were neglected for generations, as happened in the X case. I am determined that we should address the issues related to the eighth amendment. Let the Citizens' Assembly do the very important work it needs to do.

See this speech in context