John Paul Phelan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I agree with Deputy Corcoran Kennedy on the importance of Members' placing on record their position on this issue and all other issues. As abortion has been the most dominant issue in my political life, I believe it is more important still that Members do so on this issue. I have listened to most of the debate and, with few exceptions, it has been worth hearing.

6 o’clock

I acknowledge the efforts of the Ceann Comhairle. He is nearly the father of the Dáil at this stage. I also acknowledge the efforts of those who sat on the committee, took part in the hearings and heard evidence from witnesses over several weeks. It is often a thankless job but I think it was worthwhile.

It is worth pointing out that when we discuss the findings of the committee we should also recognise what has changed. I was a child of the 1980s and I have vague recollections of the referendum that took place in the early 1980s. Peter Sutherland has been referenced. He recognised that the conflict of rights proposed in the eighth amendment between the mother and the unborn child could lead to an adverse situation. Ultimately, that was what happened with the X case and the legislative reaction that the Oireachtas belatedly took some years ago with the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act. That was a difficult time.

As a man, I am conscious that I will never find myself in the position of being asked to carry a crisis pregnancy. However, I agree with Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan and other speakers that it is more than simply a women's health issue. It should be acknowledged that, first and foremost, it does affect mothers.

I will never forget what Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy referred to, the practice of churching, and when my mother explained it to me for the first time. My mother is someone who goes to mass every day of the week that there is mass. She was shamed by the practice that was carried on in her name and in the names of so many Catholics throughout the country for so long. Thankfully, it does not happen anymore.

I was fortunate to grow up in a safe, loving and encouraging family in the 1980s as part of a community in south County Kilkenny. I often laugh when I think back to my father's siblings, who are now gone, and what they would think if they could see me in the Oireachtas now. I did not come from a political background. However, I came from a background that was steeped in current affairs and the events of the 1980s. It was a strange time. Ireland was struggling to reimagine itself and look towards a more liberal future. In the 1980s much of our society was controlled by the church and many of the attitudes of the public were controlled by what was preached at them over the weekend.

I have a vague recollection of the Kerry babies scandal. I can remember the RTÉ news coverage, which became measured after some time, when those involved became conscious of the fact that younger ears were listening. The reporting was couched in the language that made it seem acceptable, but it can never be acceptable. I also remember seeing the statue of the Virgin Mary in Granard and the dreadful case and what happened to the young woman. I never look back on the old days and think that Ireland was a super place in which to live, but I was fortunate because I grew up against that background with a secure family.

I want to spell out clearly what my issues are with the report of the committee. I cannot ever support the conscious purposeful destruction of a viable pregnancy. Contrary to much media speculation at the time, I had no problem supporting the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill. I have no problem with amending our Constitution and laws to place on an equal footing the health as well as the life of a mother. I have no problem placing a choice in the hands of parents who are carrying a child that will not live. They should have the opportunity to exercise a choice that they would rather not have to make. Equally, as a legislator, I cannot support any legislation, inside or outside the House, that would see the purposeful destruction of a viable pregnancy.

We are all products of the background against which we grew up. I am not a particularly Catholic person, despite my name. I am the ultimate à la carteversion. However, I believe in a society based on rights.

I acknowledge what Deputy Corcoran Kennedy said about the Constitution not being the place to discuss or cover issues of women's health. She is perfectly right about that. However, it is the right place to cover issues of the right to live and exist. All other rights are secondary to the right to be in the first place.

I do not understand the argument from the extreme position of some of the pro-choice advocates. I acknowledge that there are extreme positions on all sides. I find myself in the middle with the vast majority of the public. I cannot understand how a newborn child who is five minutes or five hours or five weeks old can have full rights, but a child not yet born does not have full rights. I do not have the wisdom of Solomon and I do not know when life begins. I certainly do not believe that a fertilised egg is a human being. However, I believe that the proposition from the committee that abortion should be available for up to 12 weeks is problematic. Not only do I believe that it is unacceptable, but I believe there is a considerable chance that if it was put to the public, it would be defeated. Anyone who thinks otherwise does not talk to the public very often. I do my own vox popevery day. We all probably do that every day when we go outside the door. The issue for the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill was the conflict of rights between the mother and the unborn child. The issue that I hear now relates to the 12 week proposal. It has settled into the public mind and I believe a significant majority of people legitimately hold views and will not support it.

I believe that the people have the right to vote on what should and should not be in their Constitution. I find myself in partial agreement with Deputy Corcoran Kennedy again on whether this should ever have been in the Constitution. I can only vaguely remember those debates and the terrible politicking that went on at the time. I read about it afterwards.

I am conscious of a good friend of mine who was the product of a sexual assault, a rape. It is the most heinous crime that could be committed against any woman or man in many respects. I could not really look him in the face and say that the world would be better if he did not exist. Whether his mother or any woman who finds herself in that position should have the right to a termination is probably not something I am qualified to discuss. However, I am conscious of that when I hear it being debated every time. He is a very successful person. Even if he was not and even if he was sweeping the streets, as my mother would say, it would not matter. I believe firmly that the people want provisions, whether in the Constitution or the law, to allow mothers and their medical advisers, doctors and practitioners to be able to make the decisions they have to make, especially in those emergency situations. Some such decisions have resulted in high-profile cases in recent years. Equally, I believe that significant numbers of people have a problem with introducing in our law a provision that would allow the destruction of a viable pregnancy. I do not think that will change. I hope that the debate here and outside will remain civilised, but I fear from past experience that it will not.

I will finish with my anecdote of the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill. Despite water charges, property taxes and so on, the reason I had to put security in my office in Thomastown, Kilkenny was because of the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill. Two elderly men came in quoting the Bible at me. I sat them down and we had a long discussion about what was under consideration in the legislation. I put a question to them about their position if a woman's life was under imminent threat and she had two, three, four, ten, one or no children at home. How do we measure that conflict? How do we adjudicate that conflict? I was struck by the fact that one of the men said "Yes" and agreed that in such cases there should be the capacity for a doctor to make that decision, as provided for in the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill.

I was also struck by what was said by the other fellow who more or less said she should be allowed to die. They had an open row in my office. In my 39 years of life this has been the most contentious issue the country has faced and it will be contentious again, but I hope there will be a civilised discussion. Equally, however, I believe we should be prepared to listen to the other reasoned arguments. That is what I intend to do in the next few weeks and months and hope others will do so too.

See this speech in context