Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am sharing time with Deputy Joan Collins.

Voting "Yes" is the necessary first step to ensure safe, legal and compassionate medical care is afforded to all women on an equal basis in Ireland. People are ready to repeal the eighth amendment because they are free to be more compassionate now and, unlike at any other time in our past, we are beginning to understand the principles of equality and equal rights. People have moved on more than most politicians in this House, many of whom will play catch-up on this issue, which may be the reason some will decide not to campaign or canvas in the lead-up to the referendum. I will canvass in my own constituency of Donegal where I have met many people who believe the eighth amendment needs to go.

I have seen a change in attitudes over time. Never before would someone have felt comfortable approaching me to express hope for a successful repeal vote. This is reflective of a change in the discourse on abortion and women's health care generally. However, abortion is still treated as a dirty word because public discourse on the issue has been suppressed for so long. It is important that a safe space is created for people who want to engage when we are canvassing because it will be the undecided who will determine the outcome of the referendum.

Much work remains to be done, particularly against the backdrop of mistruths and fake news. The controversy unfolding with regard to Facebook and Cambridge Analytica should be a lesson to us all in terms of the lengths to which opponents will go to win a campaign and the power of private sector interests to manipulate campaigns. It also serves to remind us of the real threats to democracy and the need to resource our regulatory and oversight mechanisms to enable fair referendums and campaigns to take place. Unfortunately, it will be too late for reforms arising from the current investigation into Facebook and Cambridge Analytica to be implemented in time for the referendum on the eighth amendment. However, I am glad the Data Protection Commissioner is examining Facebook's role in the controversy unfolding in the United Kingdom and its effects on data usage here. This is especially important considering that Facebook's European headquarters are located in Dublin. It demonstrates that tighter regulation of companies' use of citizens' information is needed, as is monitoring of false news. Too often, we are exposed to myths and mistruths and pseudo-science presented as fact, with individuals claiming to be professionals in a particular field speaking with authority on an issue, despite not having any credentials to back up their claims.

Manipulation of the truth by third parties, individuals and campaigns that want to exploit public fears is already occurring ahead of the referendum. How can someone present false statistics, such as those presented in respect of Down's syndrome in the UK and Iceland, and be quoted by the media without any prior fact-checking? How can someone be allowed to stand in front of a school with grotesque imagery that does not adequately portray the truth of abortion and causes distress to vulnerable persons and children?

I echo calls made by other Opposition Deputies for greater transparency in online political campaigns to prevent the dissemination of disinformation ahead of the abortion referendum. Attention has been drawn to fake Facebook pages which, while purporting not to be related to the referendum campaign, include phrases and messages similar to those used by the "No" camp. Not only are these pages not sanctioned by the "No" side, but they are not operated by parties registered with Standards in Public Office Commission, SIPO. I understand that despite SIPO's efforts to have the Government provide clarification on third party involvement in campaigns, the Government has not responded to its call to do so.

The next step will require us, as parliamentarians, to use our privileged access to information and facts to vote for legislation which best protects the rights of our constituents. If Deputies were to truly engage with their constituents, they would recognise that everyone deserves the right to access to proper health care and bodily autonomy. I also believe all of us would support legislation to allow for unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks of gestation.

While I support the joint committee's recommendation to provide for unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks, I believe gestational limits have no place in legislation. Such limits are merely moral and political barriers for people who need an abortion and will only create a string of more hard cases in future. If we claim to trust or support women, we must acknowledge that they will make the best decision for themselves and their babies in the later stages of pregnancy. Abortion is required for a range of medical reasons outside the 12 weeks' limit which would fall outside the categories proposed by the joint committee. We must have a system that supports all women, regardless of what decision they make, noting that it is their decision and our role is simply to support them.

I understand the Together4Yes campaign will be officially launched this Thursday. The campaign includes a plethora of organisations and local groups which have come together to support repeal of the eighth amendment. I commend all those involved on the hard work they have done in bringing about a conversation on abortion in which dignity and respect are central. We must also recognise the medical community whose professionalism has been widely scrutinised at political level since the eighth amendment was inserted in the Constitution. It has come out strongly in defence of women's rights to health care at home.

Most striking have been those who have told their varied and compelling stories so strongly and bravely, despite the lingering toxicity created by the eighth amendment. Let us not forget how heavily the Constitution must have weighed on many women in this State and how heavily it continues to weigh on those who have carried the burden of the eighth amendment. Let us imagine this weight being lifted once the "Yes" vote has been carried. Those who made the decision to terminate, travelled to see their decision through and returned to tell their stories will no longer be seen as criminals under the eighth amendment but as liberators from a long and oppressive regime that has no place in a modern compassionate society.

See this speech in context