Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Tá áthas orm deis a fháil cúpla focal a rá ar an mBille seo, an Bille Sláinte (Seirbhísí Foirceanta Toirchis) (Criosanna Rochtana Sábháilte), 2023. Is ceist casta é seo mar téann sé ar ais go buncheist; cén uair a thosaíonn an beatha daonna? Tá sé deacair sainmhíniú a dhéanamh air sin ach má chreideann tú gur duine daonna atá ionat ón am go ngintear thú, bheadh dearcadh amháin agat. Má chreideann tú nach duine daonna, bheadh dearcadh eile agat. Téann sé sin go croí ceiste atá thar a bheith casta.

Is léir go bhfuil trí dhearcthaí sa bpobal. Ar dtús, tá iad siúd a chreideann ag am ar bith gur féidir ginmhilleadh a dhéanamh. Ansin tá iad siúd a chreideann, taobh istigh de théarmaí an Achta, nach é an cúis atá le ginmhilleadh máthair a shábháil - níor chreid mé riamh gur ginmhilleadh a bhí ansin - ach le beatha a shábháil. Sa gcás áirithe sin, creideann siadsan nár cheart ginmhilleadh a dhéanamh. Ansin tá daoine ann a chreideann - agus déarfainn go bhfuil siúd thart ar an tríú chuid freisin - go mba cheart, i gcásanna áirithe, ginmhilleadh a cheadú ach go mba cheart go mbeadh srianta ann. Abortion is a complex issue. As I said in Irish, you could divide the population into three thirds. First are those who believe that abortion is a legitimate and correct thing to do, with very little restriction whatsoever. I think they account for about one third of the population, according to opinion polls in The Irish Times.

Second, one third believe that abortion should be legal but with restrictions, and one third oppose abortion if its purpose is, as said in the Act, the killing of the foetus. In other words, the argument about the life of the mother does not arise in a case like that, because if the purpose is to save the mother it is not abortion, according to the Act. Each person to their own conscience and beliefs. It is important that I respect Deputy Bacik's beliefs, which would not be shared by me. I also hope that she can share my deep concern for what I consider to be human life.

We are not here to debate abortion in itself, but we are here to debate a Bill about safe access zones. There are a number of wider issues that arise here. I do not know if this is the first time that we have brought in legislation outlawing certain types of protests or actions, no matter how peaceful they are, but allowing any other actions of protest outside the same buildings. Perhaps the Minister can tell me. What happens if, for argument's sake, there is a pro-choice protest in Dublin in favour of amending the law to liberalise it, which is trying to persuade people to allow more abortion, and it marches past a number of medical clinics? Is that going to be a breach of the law? If there was a pro-life march down town, arguing for the opposite but arguing over the same subject, will that be legal? The whole idea of protest is trying to persuade people. What does the law say about protest marches going past baby hospitals and clinics, with protesters holding up banners telling people to protect human life and not to have an abortion? My second point, and it is a basic rule of law and nothing to do with the specific issue, is that you bring in law if you are advised that there is a need for the law. Is it correct that in September 2019, Garda Commissioner Drew Harris wrote to the then Minister for Health to advise that the existing public order legislation is adequate to deal with the kind of protests witnessed at hospitals and clinics to date, and that the introduction of exclusion zones would be redundant because of the existing current laws and the fact that no instance of criminality has been reported or observed? That is the second basic principle of law. A law should not be introduced if it is not necessary, because every law has unintended consequences and restrictions.

I absolutely agree that people should not be hassled when they are going to a doctor's clinic, a hospital or whatever. There is no question about that, but do we not already have the power to stop that? Taking doctor's clinics, for example, the reality is that nobody knows what patients are going into the clinic for. There was talk about rural clinics. Certainly, in my experience of the rural clinic, nobody knows your business. They might know you, but they do not know your business if you go to see the doctor. Therefore, the idea that people could be targeted does not add up. It seems to me that this law was written with abortion clinics in mind, à lathe arrangement in Britain. I think that we need to tease this Bill out. I hope the Government does not try to rush it through the House. I have always had a fetish about rushed legislation of any type. I think it is a very bad habit. I hope we take a very detailed look at this and go through it line by line, now that we have the legislation. I hope the Minister brings it to the committee and that whatever time needs to be taken will be taken so that we do not have a whole lot of unintended consequences and bad precedents in relation to other forms of protest over other things that this might be used as a precedent for. I must say that I think that this Bill is more to satisfy a lobby group than to solve a real problem that exists in society. As I said, it would appear that the Garda does not think it needs this power, and it is always looking for power, as the Minister and I know.

See this speech in context