Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Half a million people lost their lives in order to prove a point. What point? Freedom of speech, freedom of expression and that one person had the right to hate another openly, which obviously draws a response. That is where the problem is not being addressed by the Members opposite.

I have some reservations, though I will vote for the legislation. I have a different reason for having some worries about it. I believe whatever services are available within and approved by the State, whether for people’s health or under any legislation, the legislation is there for the public. It should not be for somebody else to say they want to know why a particular location is being used or that they have the right to know. We have heard this from people in other areas. We do not have the right to know other people’s business. It is as simple as that. There is no right anywhere I know of whereby somebody can ask why somebody is attending a certain clinic or doctor's surgery or hospital. There is no right to know. That is a private matter for the individual concerned and that individual has every right to go to or from a hospital, doctor’s surgery or anywhere else in the State of their own volition. It is their business only and they should not have to ask somebody if it is all right to attend a particular location for x, y or z. We do not have the right to know everything and we do not have the right to hate.

The sooner we come to grips with the situation we have seen in this country and others about the right to hate, the better. How many times have we seen people kicked, beaten, stabbed, shot and so on to death in our cities and on our streets because people hated one another? I do not see any reason to give imprimatur to such activity. We need to speak out vehemently about it because this cannot go on.

My only worry concerns identifying the locations people are attending, whether a doctor’s surgery, a solicitor’s office or anywhere, and the idea that somebody has the right to know what they are going there for. It is none of their business. The individual has the right to privacy and that has been proven again and again. I cannot understand why we have got this mixed up with the right to live in one’s country, avail of its services and do so with no apology to anybody and at will.

We had many tragic and heart-rending situations in this country before the original legislation was passed five years ago, which we dealt with in the repeal of the eighth amendment and the long debate and committee inquiry which went before it. One of the things that impressed me at the time was the notion put forward that there would be a mad rush for women to have abortions at every hand’s turn and everybody would want an abortion. That is not what the women before the committee said. They came forward with tragic situations, concerns about life, health, mental health and about generally not being able to avail of what was required at the time to protect their lives. They found themselves isolated, in the eye of the storm and with nobody willing to help. They were traumatised. The committee was quite correct in identifying the ways to ensure some modicum of recognition was given to their situation, and it was.

The point I emphasise is this. Women have a right to access the services anticipated in this Bill. I am concerned about the fact the location at which they might attend such services will be identifiable to a greater extent than is necessary. I do not think it is necessary at all. It is their private business to attend whenever they want and as required by themselves. It is part and parcel of our duty in this House to support and protect such women. I have another issue on the support and protection of women which I will deal with at a different stage.

See this speech in context