This is my second time to speak and I believe I will have another opportunity tomorrow, which is to be welcomed. When I spoke earlier, I read out an email that was sent to me by the parents of a young woman who has Down syndrome. I note the reaction to that on social media from groups that would style themselves as being pro-life, which is very disappointing. We in this Chamber have an obligation to lead by example when it comes to the tone of the debate regarding the eighth amendment. I think that, for the next couple of months, I might just stay away from social media.
When people can be anonymous and hide behind faceless accounts, they sometimes engage in trolling. We should not allow that to deter us from the respectful and important debate that we must have.
I commend the committee's Chair and all of its members. Many have referred to being on a journey. They can say that because they listened and did not go to the committee with closed minds. Instead, they approached the evidence with open minds.
I thank the members of the Citizens' Assembly, who gave freely of their time. Were I to be asked, I am not sure that I would put my name forward in similar circumstances. Not that Malahide is not beautiful. Of course it is, but I do not believe I would want to spend my weekends there discussing the issues that the assembly has tackled. Its members did us a service. They heard a great deal of evidence. I was fortunate enough to have the time to attend a few of their debates, but that I was able to follow online was helpful. When the committee came to discuss this, a large amount of work had already been done for us. That is not to say that we did not do our own work - we did - or that we were not diligent and attentive in that work, but we were also mindful of the fact that the Citizens' Assembly had put a considerable amount of information into the public domain and had shared it with us.
Unfortunately, the committee had to hear some difficult evidence. Other Deputies referred to the evidence given by the group Termination for Medical Reasons Ireland. Perhaps some of my colleagues would like to say that they had a bit of dust in their eyes, but by the time that Ms Claire Cullen-Delsol and Mr. Gerry Edwards had finished telling us not just their own personal stories, which were touching, but also the stories of their group's members, there was not a dry eye among members. It was emotional. We were all a little embarrassed and reminded of the fact that the UN had characterised the treatment of Ms Amanda Mellet as cruel, inhumane and degrading. Those who stayed for that debate and listened with an open mind to what was said left the committee room that night resolved that, even if we did nothing else, we would not continue to put women and their families through this cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment.
For that to happen and for us as a people to be able to make that decision, we need to repeal the eighth amendment. There will be much repetition in the House in the next couple of weeks. When we start talking, we will return to the inevitability of the Oireachtas having to tackle the issue of the eighth amendment. When the master of the Rotunda Hospital says in no uncertain terms and in an unbiased way that, as a medical professional, the eighth amendment prevents him from delivering the full range of health care to the women in his care, we must take notice. We cannot ignore our medical professionals telling us that there is something in our Constitution that prevents them from delivering a full range of care to women. If we ignore them and say that we as a House and a people are happy that that man and his team cannot deliver those services, then we are telling women that their service will be second class and that they are second rate citizens. That is not what I am hearing in this debate. I am hearing people who want to put women first.
