Eamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

The Green Party will also support repeal of the eighth amendment to the Constitution and the commitment to enact legislation along the lines of the many recommendations of both the Citizens' Assembly and the Oireachtas committee to provide for the choice for women to have an abortion up to the first three months of pregnancy in this State, overseen and managed by Irish hospitals rather than in the UK. This is not an easy position. Over the years in our party, like many others, there have been very different views, and there is a respect for different views - there always has been - in recognition that this is an issue of conscience. This is a complex and highly important issue. Our own position changed about three or four years ago, I think. Members of the youth wing of the Green Party, through our constitutional process, said the party's position had to change, which it did. It has been further revised in the past eight months, after the conclusion of the Citizens' Assembly's deliberations on the matter, moving, as I said, towards the position that was outlined by that group. I commend the Citizens' Assembly on the work it did and the members of the Oireachtas committee on the way in which they carried out their work, which I think is helping us in how we have this debate. Other parties very much objected to the use of the assembly. I think it worked and has helped us and I hope it can lead to a respectful debate on all sides.

We have respect for people on all sides. I have very good friends who will be on the other side of the campaign.

I agree with them that life does start at conception. I do not see another way it can be assessed. The other day, a very good friend asked me whether he could provide me with details on what exactly that means at each stage. I know because I see people campaigning outside here with large posters showing in very graphic ways a foetus at six, eight or ten weeks and that is a reality. That is life as it is evolving in the womb. My position has changed in recent years. I believe what we tried to do in 1983, in trying to balance, or acknowledge, that life and trying to guarantee it, at the same time as having regard to the equal life of the mother, was not correct thing to do and has not worked. At various stages in the legal wranglings of past 35 years that has been clear. Relatively early on, Harry Whelehan brought to a head that the question on the right to travel had to be taken into account. We, as a people, at that moment clearly said there is not equality between the right to life and the right of the mother to choose how that pregnancy would proceed, and on that occasion we decided on the right to choose. At every step of the way, the legal teasing out of this issue in the various cases, including the X case and Y case, has shown that legal attempt to protect the right to life has not worked and will not work and needs to be changed.

Ultimately, the reason this is the case is because if a woman is in a pregnancy that she does not want to continue with, or that she cannot continue with, she has the ability, and in my mind the right, to choose to terminate it to make sure it does not go to full term. That is a reality that has existed in this country as far back as we can recall. Our history and archaeology are full of cases where we see that women made that choice down through millennia and it is something that is not going to change. If women are making that choice we need to support them, to be with them and to provide the best medical care, and that is why I believe we should repeal the eighth amendment and provide for that choice in a more honest way. I do not mean honest in the sense I am accusing the other side of being dishonest, but honest in terms of recognising that is what is happening and that we should not abandon our women in the choices they make.

I would like to argue that something we can have in this debate is the chance to broaden it out, to see points where there might be agreement on such choices. There is an area on which I find agreement with friends on the pro-life side, if one calls it that as I consider myself pro-life also. The one point where I have agreement with friends on the other side of this referendum debate is that we should try to make sure we really provide a free choice for women in every circumstance and in every different pregnancy. With regard to our current economic system, whatever the range of complex arrangements that leads to a situation where a woman decides to terminate her pregnancy, on many occasions it is driven by the economic realities in the State that make it incredibly difficult to countenance raising a child. Earlier we had a debate on the issue of rent and housing. It relates to this issue of abortion, because for many young couples or women, faced with a pregnancy they did not expect, where everything is not set up, where they do not have the house and home and everything ready to go, it can be an impossible situation which may drive people to say they cannot do it. Our entire system is based on a property market that is not serving and suiting our people.

I would go further and say deliberate political choices have been made in recent years by all parties which provide a limitation to the choices that a woman might have. I will cite the example from five or six years ago of the withdrawal of support for lone parents. That was a really strong statement to young women that if they are lone parents in a difficult pregnancy situation the State will not support them. That is what it said. Last week, we saw women outside the Dáil making the valid case that they were discriminated against in 2012 when their pensions were cut. One can only agree the reason is they had taken the choice at some point to act as a parent or carer at home and that is not valued by the State or the Government at this time.

If we look at everything we do in the budget, and at our tax laws and supports, they are all about labour activation, getting everyone working and getting the economy growing and keeping it growing. It is not about creating a State where a young person in their early or mid-20s, even if she got pregnant in a situation which was not completely planned, would know she could do it because she would know the State really supported what she would have to do in the next few years. We need to do this at the same time as we repeal the eighth amendment so we really have proper choices to help our young women in difficult circumstances.

I agree with the provision of a three-month timeline because I disagree with the other methods one might have to parse out one type of pregnancy versus another, and stating someone can have access to a termination in X, Y or Z circumstances, as if we can parse out the values of different types of pregnancies and different types of life. It is more appropriate to set a timeline, provide the mother with the choice, provide support with doctors, and try to provide everything we can make that choice as free as possible.

I would prefer repeal and then for us to set out the guidelines on how we would legislate. The courts will and should listen to the people in any referendum. They do not necessarily need us to set out in the Constitution the details of what the Oireachtas can do. It is appropriate for us to try to do it ourselves. It is appropriate that we look for the support and help of the Medical Council in this regard. When it comes to legislating on what will be a very complex legal area, and no matter what we do in our Constitution, rather than trying to legislate for every twist and turn, it is appropriate for us to look to the Medical Council, which has expertise in the myriad of cases because every pregnancy is different with regard to the balancing act between protecting life in all its different forms.

I appreciate the chance to speak in the debate and I look forward to the referendum, where we will campaign. We will do so in a respectful manner but will look for repeal of the eighth amendment.

See this speech in context