I begin by commending all Members of this House on voting to their own best judgment and for voting according to their conscience on the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill last night. These are difficult and, indeed, emotional times for many Members of this House, and we all struggle to find a way forward toward realising a deep and passionate commitment to protect the lives of both mother and child when a crisis in pregnancy occurs. I do not believe that, despite the very heated exchanges we have had in the House, anyone here wants to see a situation where threats to the life of the mother or child will increase in our country.

That being said, there are a few fundamental issues I feel obliged to return to today. I refer in particular to the constant assertion of the Taoiseach that this Bill, part of which was voted on last night, is fully in line with the Constitution. In fact, only last week the Taoiseach stated that the Government is not able to unpick the Supreme Court decision and, therefore, to attempt to do so would render the Bill unconstitutional. This week, however, one of the Supreme Court judges who decided the X case has said the judgment is moot and is not binding on Government. He also said that the X case itself was moot because the 14 year old girl at the centre of it miscarried and did not have an abortion. The case was, he said “peculiar to its own particular facts”. Mr. Justice O’Flaherty could hardly have made the issue any clearer for us.

This is a speech.

It has also been brought to my attention that the Oireachtas has no right to vote on a Bill that contains provisions that have been put to the Irish people in a referendum and which they, in a sovereign exercise, rejected. The Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill 2013 contains two provisions which were put to the Irish people in a referendum in 2002 and which they rejected. These provisions, which stand rejected by the Irish people in a referendum, cannot be included in the proposed legislation and voted on by the Oireachtas, I believe.

Thank you.

One moment, please.

Will you put your question, please? Your time is up.

Let him just publish the speech.

The Irish electorate voted "No" in the 2002 referendum to repeal sections 58 and 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. The proposal to delete sections 58 and 59 of the 1861 Act-----

Sorry, Deputy. What is your question?

I have a question.

Please put it.

Yes. The electorate voted "No" in 2002 to the referendum specifying that life would only be protected from implantation, yet this Bill presumes now to legislate for protection starting at the stage of human life.

Would you put your question, please?

In light of these facts, will the Government commit to holding off on the vote on this Bill until it has time to examine these issues I have raised?

I have already asked that question, for God's sake.

Will you please allow the Chair to do the job? I do not need your help at this stage. If I do, I will be the first to call on you.

I thank Deputy Mattie McGrath. I originally heard the speech yesterday and he has repeated it today. It is a well-known construction of law that laws passed by the Oireachtas are presumed to be constitutional until the contrary is established - that is the presumption of constitutionality that is assigned to every piece of legislation that is enacted until it is deemed to be unconstitutional by the only valid authority, which is the Supreme Court of Ireland, and there is a separation of powers. Additionally, Bills which have not yet received the signature of the President also enjoy that presumption of constitutionality. That is the way it has always been in the operation of this House. It is only upon the adjudication pursuant to Article 26 - an Article 26 referral in the case of a Bill - that such a presumption can be rebutted, not by a Deputy standing up in the House. It is only the courts, including the Supreme Court, that, in deference to the doctrine of the separation of powers, have the jurisdiction, the capacity and the authority to decide on the validity of any law, including a Bill, and the courts must do so having regard to the Constitution.

In regard to the power to repeal legislation, that of course rests here with the Legislature. This Legislature is gathered on the authority of the people at the last election and we have the authority, if we deem it, to repeal other enactments, including sections of the 1861 Act that the Deputy argues we have not got.

The Minister, Deputy Varadkar, wants it referred to the Supreme Court.

I wish to inform the Minister, as he mentioned the courts, that a court challenge is getting under way today. Indeed, a press conference will be held at 3 p.m. outside Leinster House to enlighten him further on that.

This was made explicitly clear in the Twenty-fifth Amendment of the Constitution, which provides for the operation of a mechanism whereby proposed changes to Article 40.3 of the Constitution, such as the text proposed for legislation on the Protection of Life in During Pregnancy Bill, will be put to the people in a referendum. What about all the promises in Lisbon that the people would be consulted? While that was not the Minister's Government, he was a supporter of it as well. Where did those promises go?

I want to put on the record of the House serious concerns about the heavy-handed way the whole debate has been carried out, especially last night, which was ridiculous. I know from talking to our Whip and the other Whips that they were not consulted in any way. I, as an employer, understand health and safety legislation.

Would you put your question, please? This is Leaders' Questions, not statements.

Yes, I am saying-----

What is your question?

My question is this. He and the other Ministers here, Deputy Bruton in particular, have respect for health and safety laws and employment legislation, which apply to everybody here, both Members and staff.

What do you know about employment law?

Excuse me. I am an employer. I would love to know how many you employ. You could not create a job if you were paid.

Through the Chair, please.

I am asking the Minister will he have respect for health and safety, the working time directive and everything else, and will he obey them in future?

It is a small contractual matter-----

He is one of your own, Timmy.

You lost one of yours last night.

Excuse me. The Deputy will get an answer from the Minister. The Dáil is in session, in case Members do not know.

I said in reply to Deputy Martin earlier that I respect the authority and the right of the elected Members of this House to act as a Parliament.

No, he does not respect that.

The Minister should proceed and ignore the side comments.

It is abundantly clear. I know there are people of such arrogance that they believe that if one does not agree with them-----

The Minister would know about that.

Please. It is not even your question.

He punched above his weight on that one.

-----one should be denied the right even to speak. Let me say this to Deputy Mattie McGrath. It is extraordinary that he would contemplate a court challenge when the deliberative process of the Oireachtas is still in mid-stream. That is extraordinary. I regard that as a contempt for the House. Everybody can-----

It is the right decision.

Everything we do is justiciable under the Constitution but the right to legislate is uniquely placed in the Oireachtas.

Then legislate for fatal foetal abnormalities.

The will of the people determines who sits in the Oireachtas. Let us at least carry out our constitutional duty in an open, clear and democratic fashion.

It is open to anybody, once that process is complete, to oversee, review or judicially challenge that decision. That is all well and good and in accordance with the Constitution. In the meantime, however, there must be respect for the authority and rights of the elected representatives of the people to do their job.