Labhrás Ó Murchú (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

There is a serious possibility that Members are ignoring the Constitution. I acknowledge that all the legal advice will have been given and am certain the Attorney General has examined the matter but Members should consider for a moment that if it is in conflict with what is in the Constitution, there then could be a challenge.

As legislators, it is important that Members put both sides of the story in the debate. I get very disillusioned by some of the responses when Members wish to speak. One is not obliged to agree with what the other person is saying. However, if an amendment is before the House, it is important that Members examine it. Moreover, if two views emerge, there ultimately is a procedure for deciding the outcome and this has been evident in the amendments already debated.

I can find common cause with the arguments of Senators Leyden, Walsh and Ó Domhnaill with regard to this amendment and I believe there is a grave danger that Members are not considering at all the life of the unborn child. If this is the case, Members are then in conflict with the Constitution. There is no need to get too animated or excited about the debate and I note that on foot of all the debate held thus far and amendments tabled, Members are coming near the end of their consideration of the legislation at this Stage.

However, for such a fundamental issue in all the debate and if this is the only focus that remains, it is important that Members consider the life of the unborn child. I have been a little worried by much of the debate in this Chamber, in that while Members rightly must consider the life of the mother, this should not be to the exclusion of the life of the unborn child. I cannot imagine anyone in this House or anyone outside of it who would disagree with a comment based on that premise. Who would not wish to consider the life of a mother or the life of the child? Is that not what the amendment is about?

I do not wish to go into the issue of suicidal ideation, which has been dealt with. It also was dealt with in the hearings and I am unsure whether there has been any great follow-up from that. It has happened and may be history at this point but no matter how tired Members are, how weary they are or how exasperated they are because they must listen to different views, were they to avoid the fundamental protection in the Constitution for both the mother and the unborn child, as legislators I do not believe they would be doing the right thing.

I am sure the Minister of State will tell Members this matter has been examined legally. However, Members also are aware of what happened in the past when they were so sure something was copper-fastened legally but this proved not to be the case. Members still may find themselves in the courts. Would it not be far better here in this Chamber, as legislators, quietly, calmly and with reflection, to tease out this issue and put Members' own minds at ease? This is what the people expect from us. I do not like the idea of name-calling. I do not like the idea of heckling or interruption. It does not bring Members anything at the end of the day but I hope this amendment and any other amendment to be tabled right up to 8 p.m. tomorrow evening can be dealt with in the spirit that all Members would like to protect human life. I believe this to be what this is about.