Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity) | Oireachtas source

If, when the original Act was passed, we had included the need for a report within six months of commencement of Parts 2 and 3 of the Act, we would be in a different situation now because presumably the issue would have been spotted six months in rather than three years in and it could have been rectified rather than the delay that we have. That is the purpose of inserting these kinds of report mechanisms into legislation.

The issue dealt with in subsection (b) of the amendment is probably the most substantive of the points in the report. We understand the situation with subsection (a): it is an attempt to put political pressure on the Government, the Civil Service, the committees, etc., to progress the assisted human reproduction Bill. It is not fair to characterise it as attempting to legislate for things that happen outside the State. As Deputy Coppinger said, it is a question of how we treat children who come into this world as a consequence of activities outside the State. We have the power to legislate for that as opposed to clinics in other countries.

Subsection (b) refers to procedures "outside the State or otherwise outside the remit of the Act". In particular that deals with the issue of home inseminations which is not dealt with by the original legislation at all. It is a huge area where for reasons of cost and so on many people have home inseminations and are not catered for. While inserting this does not resolve it, it means that in six months we will get a report on what is being done to resolve it. If it has not been resolved in six months, it will create a pressure for the Government. Therefore, it will focus minds on the need to deal with this.

See this speech in context