Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Ar an gcéad dul síos, tá mé sásta deis a bheith agam labhairt ar an mBille stairiúil seo. Tá gníomhaithe agus polaiteoirí ag caint faoin ábhar seo le cuid mhaith blianta. Ghlac daoine áirithe páirt i bhfeachtas fada thar níos mó ná 30 bliain ionas go dtiocfaimid go dtí an pointe seo. Tuigim go bhfuil imní agus buairt ar dhaoine, ach is maith an rud é go bhfuilimid ag an staid seo anois agus gur féidir linn toil an phobail, mar a dhéanadh soiléir le linn an reifrinn, a chur i ngníomh. Tá deis againn anois, faoi dheireadh, reachtaíocht a chur ar bun agus cúnamh agus tacaíocht do sláinte agus saolta mhná mar chroílár na reachtaíochta sin. Is dócha nach mbeidh brú nó éigean orthu amach anseo dul go Sasana nó aon rud mar sin a dhéanamh faoi mar atá faoi láthair.

I am very happy to have the opportunity to speak on this Bill. It has been a long time coming to the floor of the Dáil and one that the majority of the Irish people wholeheartedly endorsed in May of this year. With that a burden and blemish on the face of the State and of the Constitution has been wiped away. The eighth amendment should never have been in the Constitution. Abortion should never have been dealt with in the Constitution. This is the right way to deal with it. It was an entirely inappropriate way of legislating on the matter. As the Attorney General of the time predicted, it has caused great uncertainty and the text of the eighth amendment was almost a contradiction in terms. That is the uncertainty it created. It caused significant harm to women around Ireland. The former master of Holles Street, Dr. Peter Boylan, told the Oireachtas Joint Committee on the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution that it has caused grave harm, including death.

Many Deputies said at the time of the referendum that this need not be a bitter and divisive debate and I hope it will not be. This debate has seen the best and the worst of Irish politics. Some people took this campaign as an opportunity to say intemperate and intolerable things but also many on both sides of the debate exercised great restraint, understanding and compassion, in being able to put themselves in the position of other people and of people who took different views on this proposal. It is quite remarkable that we are here.

We are now in a position to legislate, without having the fetter of a constitutional provision, in a measured, reasonable, compassionate way. That would have seemed impossible even a short few years ago - as recently as during the lifetime of the previous Dáil - with the legislation that was passed following the X case, the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act, which seemed a significant and contentious step forward. It already seems far out of date, archaic, inadequately compassionate and an excessive restriction on the rights of women and pregnant people. A remarkable amount has changed in that regard.

Tá sé suntasach súil siar a chaitheamh ar an gcomhthéacs áirithe inar tháinig an reachtaíocht isteach breis is 30 bliain ó shin. Bhí daoine ag iarraidh buntáiste a bhaint amach i gcomhthéacs an cultúr polaitiúil a bhí ann ag an am. Cuireadh an reifreann os comhair an phobail agus glacadh leis, agus b'shin mar a bhí an Bunreacht ón am sin go dtí an bhliain atá againn anois. Is fiú aitheantas a thabhairt dóibh siúd a chur i gcoinne an fhoráil sin ag an am, rud nach raibh fuirist. Tá moladh agus aitheantas tuillte ag na daoine sin as an gcrógacht a léiríodar nuair a chuaigh siad in aghaidh sruth mheon an phobail ag an am. Tá go leor daoine ann atá tar éis níos mó ná 30 bliain a chaitheamh ag troid i gcoinne an ochtú leasú.

The eighth amendment has a long and unfortunate history. It was conceived in the context of a number of elements. To a large extent, however, it was a cynical attempt to gain political advantage at a time of tight Dáil arithmetic. Credit is particularly due to those who stood in a minority position in very difficult circumstances and when their opinions would have been marginalised. It is important in that context that the minority now is respected and if they hold a contrary view, it is important that they are allowed to express it in a reasonable and respectful way, though I do not share it. Those who were in the minority position at that time were marginalised and suffered intimidation. Some of those people remained steadfast nonetheless and were joined in the recent referendum by those who have only recently got the vote and others who do not yet have the vote. The people who fought against the eighth amendment many years ago have been fighting ever since. While it might have seemed impossible at one stage, it was through their perseverance that we are in this position whereby the constitutional block on the ability of the Oireachtas to legislate in respect of this matter has been removed. Many Members of the Oireachtas deserve credit for the referendum being brought forward and passed. That includes the Opposition, the Government, the various political parties and Independents.

The primary credit for the fact that we had a referendum and that it was passed goes to what became a mass movement. It was a mass movement that started with a small number of committed activists but which developed and took in what ultimately became quite a wide and representative cross-section of Irish society. On reading media reports anticipating the referendum from even a year ago, one would have expected that it would involve a relatively narrow coalition or would not have been fully representative in the way that it was. The margins by which the referendum was passed in areas throughout the country surprised many. It reflected the fact that this was backed by a very broad range of society. Yet again, Irish society has been shown to be well ahead of both this institution and politics.

It was not always my view that legislation of this kind would need to be passed. That is probably true of many people. I was working in Leinster House at the time of the death of Savita Halappanavar. That event had a profound impact on many people. It certainly had a significant impact on me. While it did not, in itself, change my mind overnight, it forced me to examine the basis of my position or beliefs at that time, and to read up and examine more. I did so over several years. At this point, the two pillars of my position on this are, first, that the priority in all instances needs to be the life and health of the woman and, second, that it is a wrong and violent act to coerce women into carrying to term against their wishes. It is on that basis that I was very much in favour of this legislation and of the referendum. I hope that this legislation can progress relatively well and without inordinate haste. Much of the detail will be dealt with by the select committee. I recognise that it is important to take stock of the vote that took place.

Ní dóigh liom go raibh éinne ag súil leis an tromlach a bhí i bhfábhar aisghair a dhéanamh ar an ochtú leasú. Tá sé an-suntasach gur eisigh pobal na hÉireann ráiteas chomh mór sin ar an lá. Is ceart go bhfuil daoine - fiú iad siúd nach raibh i bhfabhar an reifrinn - ag aithint gur chóir gníomh a dhéanamh de réir toil na ndaoine agus go gcaithfidh an tOireachtas glacadh leis an mhéid atá ráite ag na daoine agus an reachtaíocht seo a chur tríd. Is maith an rud é go bhfuil sé sin á ghlacadh fiú acu siúd a chur i gcoinne an mholadh i mí na Bealtaine i mbliana.

I acknowledge that people have stated that, despite having voted "No", they will not oppose the passing of this legislation. They are taking some stock of amendments and of the detail involved. That is fair enough and legitimate. It is legitimate to vote against this legislation even after the referendum, which is not to say that it is right. The referendum was on the ability of the Oireachtas to legislate and that is what the people have entrusted us to do. That is what we must do. That can take many different forms. In the coming years, there may be attempts to review this legislation. There may be amending legislation and that could take many forms. In that context, I think it is legitimate for people to oppose this legislation. That siad, it is right to support this legislation because, while the vote had a formal legal effect with a specific question that was asked, it is fairly clear, in the context of the proposals published by the Oireachtas joint committee and the Government, the shape people felt legislation would take. It is important that we give effect to that. I am sure it is quite difficult for people who voted against the referendum who will now not oppose this legislation. It is a brave thing to do. It is not easy but it is important.

Ba mhaith liom focal nó dhó a rá i dtaobh roinnt de shonraí an Bhille. Tá cuid mhaith ráite faoi ghnéithe éagsúla sa reachtaíocht, ina measc an tréimhse feithimh agus cé chomh réasúnta a bheadh sé dá mbeadh cead ag dochtúirí gan déileáil leis an gcóras seo. Tuigim, go pointe áirithe, na tuairimí atá léirithe maidir leis an tréimhse feithimh ach is dóigh liom go gcruthódh a leithéid d'fhoráil níos mó fadhbanna ná mar a réiteodh sé.

In terms of the specifics of the legislation, I echo the concern expressed by my colleague, Deputy O'Reilly, about the structure of the Bill, which has changed the emphasis from the general scheme of the Bill. The Bill now starts by outlining the offences rather than taking a more health-related approach. The offences have been moved from section 19 to section 5. That is not generally the case with other legislation, apart from perhaps criminal law, which is not a particularly good indicator.

There has been a fair bit of discussion about the waiting time of three days. We need to be guided by medical experts. To be fair to the Oireachtas committee, it did great work. I have two committee members next to me and I see others in the Chamber as well. The committee weighed all the evidence that was heard from all perspectives, but members were guided to a great extent by the views of medical professionals and we must also be so guided. I refer to Dr. Peter Boylan, the representatives of the Medical Council and the Irish College of General Practitioners who commented on that as well. Sinn Féin will be guided by such experts. To some extent it is perhaps a political decision and it could be based on optics to some extent but to a degree I understand the logic behind it in that I do not think anyone takes any significant decision lightly. If one is going to take a significant decision of this nature, if one can one should reflect on it as best as one can in the circumstances. We are already operating in a time-limited framework in the sense that abortion services are only to be provided up to 12 weeks. I think that to put in another qualifier creates difficulties, not least for people who are in a crisis. While it may be the case that in an ideal world individuals might take time to make such a decision, I do not think it is something that we should be legally forcing on people because it is most likely to have grave, unintended consequences for certain individuals.

I am also conscious of the conscience issue. I respect the fact that many members of the public and general practitioners will have moral difficulty with the legislation. Section 23(3) is appropriate and will protect conscientious objectors and that is reasonable. Apart from accident and emergency services, the public access the health system through GPs. That is the starting point for them to flow through the system. We cannot expect people who may not know the philosophical or moral position of their local GP to end up in a cul-de-sac. They should expect that any GP they go to will at least be able to direct them through the system. That is a reasonable expectation and it is not an unreasonable ask. A balance is being struck in terms of conscientious objection that is fair and reasonable.

I support the proposal that has been made that the wording should reflect pregnant people, as opposed to simply women. That is reasonable and important as it allows for inclusivity and respect for all pregnant people.

The Committee on the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution gave a lot of time to ancillary services. That is vitally important. We need serious investment in counselling and support. Sex education was examined and it is clear that it is outdated, unregulated and of a different era. That issue clearly needs to be addressed.

It was a requirement in this jurisdiction that there would be a referendum but there is no such requirement in the North. I hope it will be possible at some stage in the not-too-distant future that we will be in a position to have similar legislation there to allow for a similar regime in the North. The North has to be next. It is one of the key issues that needs to be addressed, among many outstanding political issues in the North. It is clear that the public appetite in the North is not radically different to what it is here. All parties in the North need to reflect on that, but so too do the British Government and the Government as this is a human rights issue and it must be addressed.

Tá mé sásta tacaíocht a thabhairt don reachtaíocht seo. Déanfaidh ionadaithe Shinn Féin scrúdú ar na leasuithe a bheidh á dtabhairt chun cinn ar Chéim an Choiste agus ar an Tuarascáil. Is dóigh liom go bhfuil ciall, réasún agus cothromaíocht ag baint leis an reachtaíocht seo i gcoitinne. Dá bhrí sin, beidh mé ag tacú leis.

See this speech in context