Last night I referred to Deputy McGahon and the harassment to which he had been subjected and I said that the chairman of his constituency was responsible. I have been informed since then that it was not the chairman but other party activists at constituency level who were responsible, and I would like that correction to be recorded.
I made a plea also that the Minister would indicate whether he intends to introduce legislation relating to the 1979 Act that would give the women of Ireland the protection they need against the risks inherent in the pills and devices they are using already. I hope that we will not hear anything further from those Deputies who claim to be concerned about the wellbeing of women and their demands for a fully comprehensive Bill, unless they are prepared to seek the safety of the women whom they are inviting to use these devices. The Bill now before the House provides access to contraception by law for single people and will be the most revolutionary measure on the social plane since independence. No matter what age limit is provided it will mark a break with the ethos of almost the entire known history of this country. It will have the doubtful distinction of being the first legislation since the penal days to be enacted in this land that is contrary to the law of God. The section in the Bill which is causing me most concern is that which provides for the sale of contraceptives, spermicides and sheaths to persons over the age of 18 years. One may ask if this is a redefinition of the family. If it is not, then it has nothing to do with the family and should not hide behind that term. It should be called by its proper name, a condoms availability amendment or legislation for moral decline, because those terms would more accurately describe what is inherent in this amendment. If the proposal is not for the family, then the purpose must be to prevent pregnancy from acts of adultery and fornication, and one must ask why any Government should want to do that.
On the claim made about demand for condoms and the legitimisation of it because of the number of condoms supposed to be imported into this country each year — one source has said 50 million and another 30 million — our total population is about four million. Being generous and allowing that half of those people would be involved in the use of condoms, the mind boggles at what is suggested here. I do not accept that we are hearing the truth in this. I ask the Minister if he can produce in this House the VAT or excise returns on those imports. I believe that a gross of condoms are bought wholesale for £12.83 and sold retail for £27.84. There is big money being made there somewhere, and if the quantities indicated are being imported, that would be worth investigating so that we might know who is making all this money and whether the people concerned are paying their due taxes on the profits.
This Bill which purports to make contraceptives available to people over 18 cannot be policed. We cannot police the alcohol laws in that regard. Only this morning I had a letter from a concerned mother in County Kildare who is a publican and she writes that to suggest that anyone could police the proposed legislation is a nonsense. I had a letter from another mother outlining the difficulty of determining the age of young girls. She tells me that she has four daughters, that one who is 20 looks like a 13 year old while another who is 13 looks like a 20 year old and has a problem in defending her right to travel at half fare on buses. How, then, does the Minister propose to police that aspect of the legislation?
It is known that the family planning clinics are using slot machines for the provision of condoms. A slot machine does not ask questions. One merely inserts the amount of money required and the goods are provided. Another aspect that Deputy Tunney pointed out is that even if young males of 18 years would be in a position to obtain contraceptives on a legitimate basis, the likelihood is that their partners would be younger. Thereforce it would be impossible to police such legislation.
There is plenty of evidence to suggest that the making available of these devices has a very damaging effect on the health of young people and on the nation in general. In this respect I should make the House aware of the concern of many doctors though we know there are some, such as the Doctor Rynnes and the Doctor Leahys. Doctor Rynne in an interview with John Bowman on 7 February said publicly that he had no intention of keeping this law. He is Chairman of the Irish Family Planning Association. He said he intended to break the law because it was his opinion that these devices should be made available without any reference to an age limit, but here we are invited to change a law which is supposed to be a bad law while some people are claiming that the proposed law will be equally disregarded. Members of the medical profession say they are extremely concerned at recent proposals to make contraceptives freely available by law to young single people. They continue, and I quote from a letter, dated 23 October 1984, from that body.
It is our understanding that a majority of people in the State oppose such measures. (I.M.S. Poll August 1984).
We would regard the implementaction of these proposals as injurious to the physical and mental health of our youth with all its attendant social implications. If these proposals become law the inevitable consequences will be increased promiscuity, with an upsurge in venereal diseases (syphilis, gonorrhoea, herpes and chlamydia) and carcinoma of the cervix as experienced in this and other countries. The accepted high failure rate of contraceptives when used by teenagers must lead to increased teenage pregnancies and abortion.
We would like to emphasise that the setting up of an age limit for contraceptive practice is devoid of any scientific or sociological basis.
Furthermore legalising something which is productive of so much proven pathological and sociological sequelae is to us both reprehensible and horrific.
The letter is signed by 17 doctors, each of whom is expert in this field. To disregard that kind of advice is to fly in the face of reason. Many others, too, have commented on what has happened everywhere that free availability of contraceptives has been introduced. I do not know how many Deputies here had the opportunity of seeing a film last week on ITV in which was portrayed the level of depravity to which the young people of England have sunk. Little girls of nine and ten are being used in some instances for all kinds of obscenities. All of this is contingent on the free for all kind of society that has emanated from allowing these kinds of contraceptive devices to be made available where they cannot be policed.
It is interesting to note that where we here are working overtime to introduce problems that others are trying to rid themselves of, a Catholic MP, Mr. William Cash, Conservative MP for Stafford, tabled an early day motion in the House of Commons drawing attention to the link between the issues of the Warnock Report, Mrs. Gillick's case and AIDS. He called on Mr. Norman Fowler and Mr. Kenneth Clark to promote a campaign through the Health Education Council warning of the danger to health in the current trends of sexual promiscuity. Mr. Cash said that the prime justification for the Warnock proposals is to cure infertility, but he asked how many people realise that infertility often is the direct consequence of abortion or sexual disease and that abortion, sexual diseases and cancer are surely the consequence of widespread and early sexual promiscuity, often before the age of 16. Mr. Cash went on to say that in every case of abortion in an unmarried mother there is a significant risk of subsequent infertility and, where it is accompanied by sexual disease, the risk of AIDS or one of the other sexually transmitted diseases. He said it is now established that AIDS can be transmitted between heterosexuals as well as between homosexuals and that doctors fear we may be in the incubation period of a massive outbreak of AIDS for which there is only a limited chance of survival. Mr. Cash said that the Royal College of Nursing predicted recently a potential one million cases of AIDS within the next six years. He stressed that the problem is urgent, not exclusively on moral grounds, but also on social and ethical grounds and on the basis of common sense.
Despite the concern expressed by so many as to what people in Northern Ireland think of us, is it not ludicrous for us to be heading down the road that people in other places are trying to move away from? Much has been said about our young people, about their right to make decisions for themselves and if they so wish to become involved in sexual activity. It is important to draw the attention of the House to the result of the National Youth Policy Committee in which is outlined the results of a survey the committee conducted among young people between 15 and 20. When asked the question, "whose view do you take most cognisance of". 88 per cent answered that they heeded their parents most, 63 per cent indicated that they paid most attention to their clergy, while only 18 per cent said they took heed of what their politicians said. In reply to a further question, "who do you think understands you best", 84 per cent said their parents understood them best, 64 per cent their pastors and a mere 13 per cent their elected representatives. That is very significant. Here we have a Bill which is totally at variance with the wishes of the parents and their children. We have the audacity to presume that we know better than they what is good for them.
Dr. Verling, venereologist for the Eastern Health Board, says that the VD clinics at the moment cannot cope with their pressure of work. They are seeing 360 cases per week and are totally understaffed. If all this extra activity takes place, who will look after the people who will become infected, particularly at the time when the Minister for Health has had to remove their medical cards from the very young people to whom he now wishes to give condoms? That is another problem to be confronted. If they do become diseased, will they have the money to have themselves seen to? I doubt it very much, with the present degree of unemployment and the rising university fees.
We have heard much about the effects on Northern Ireland of all that is going on here and have been advised that while they have had access to contraceptives they have not been turned into a very permissive society. There is an interesting letter to the editor in The Irish Times of 15 February last from Father Denis Faul. He must have heard the claims that were being made about how little Northern Ireland had been affected. Nobody in this country doubts the sincerity and genuine commitment of this priest, both as a peacemaker and a concerned pastor. His letter states:
In your editorial of February 8th you state that "no one claims that in matters of sexual mores, they (the people of the North) have become debauched or depraved”. I do claim it and have repeatedly claimed it.
Debauchery and depravity are relative terms. What is debauchery and depravity to a Carmelite nun may not be debauchery and depravity to the staff of The Irish Times. But all can recognise a steady decline in sexual morals expressed in corruption of the young and the breakdown of marriage; the graph of decline grows steeper over the decades until the hollow globe of a society without values cracks and breaks into chaos and barbarism.