As we approach the final two weeks of the abortion referendum campaign, it is becoming absolutely clear that the Government's position is rapidly losing support among the general public. All attempts by the Taoiseach and the Government to convince the people that what he is proposing is a restrictive abortion regime are being exposed as the complete falsehoods that they are. The Minister for Health, Deputy Harris, would know that if he displayed even one ounce of political courage and responded to the numerous requests made to him, by the Save the Eighth campaign and others, to conduct an open debate on this matter. Unfortunately, he is in hiding on this issue.

Despite that fact, we have a health service that is almost in total paralysis. It is in total paralysis as far as I am concerned, yet the Minister takes no responsibility. He is the head appointed to office by the Taoiseach to deal with these issues but he lacks courage and will not take responsibility in this area. Instead, he chooses to spend his time campaigning with individuals and organisations that are in open defiance of Irish electoral law. I raised this matter with the Taoiseach some time ago and he said he had no issue with this. I find that staggering. The Taoiseach has no issue with the fact that the Minister campaigns with people operating outside the law. Where are the Taoiseach standards? A senior Minister in the Government is championing a group that made clear and illegal use of €120,000 but the Taoiseach believes that is perfectly fine. No wonder there is no accountability in the HSE or anywhere else. Not only has the Taoiseach undermined the integrity of his own campaign, he has also insulted the independence and integrity of the Standards in Public Office Commission, which made the judgment against Amnesty Ireland.

That said, I ask the Taoiseach to clarify some issues that have arisen following comments made by the Minister in The Sunday Times last weekend. The Minister mentioned that the general scheme of the Bill, which I have to hand, provides for early delivery and specifically prohibits the possibility of late-term abortions. Where in the heads of the Bill is the prohibition on late-term abortion to be found? I ask the Taoiseach to explain. I have read the Bill, as have others, and we cannot see it anywhere. I ask the Taoiseach to take some accountability for his Ministers. He has appointed them, under seal from the President, yet they can campaign with people who have acted outside the law and blatantly told everyone that they would keep the money and would not pay it back. Everybody in here operates under the Standards in Public Office Commission, and rightly so, and every elected official throughout the country must do so. Will Amnesty Ireland get away with this? Is it okay for the Taoiseach's Ministers to champion this organisation on the streets?

I strongly disagree with the Deputy. He seems to be assuming that the referendum is over and that the proposition will be defeated. I believe that the referendum and campaign are ongoing. I was on the doors in Clonsilla in my constituency as part of a cross-party canvass, listening to people, hearing their views and answering some of their questions. I believe that this referendum will carry. The people have not spoken yet. When they have spoken, we will count the votes and determine what they have said. It is somewhat arrogant for anyone to assume the outcome of this referendum already. At the start of this campaign, I said something that I really believe, which is that this campaign should always be respectful and should never be personalised. By and large, I am glad that has been the case so far. Unlike previous abortion referendums, this campaign has largely been respectful and has rarely been personalised but I regret the extent to which some people, including Deputy Mattie McGrath, have sought to personalise this against the Minister, Deputy Harris. That is absolutely wrong. The Minister, Deputy Harris, is putting forward a proposal that the Government is making following an all-party committee, following a Citizens' Assembly. The people will have their say on that. I do not think he, or anyone on any side of this referendum, should be targeted personally in any way, whether through posters, demands for one-to-one debates, or anything of that nature. It is wrong and it is not what people want.

Amnesty International's current campaign is registered with the Standards in Public Office Commission, SIPO. It is above board and I do not believe anyone has produced any evidence to the contrary. The Deputy is referring to a different campaign it ran maybe a year or two ago, against which SIPO has made some negative findings. That matter is now before the courts. Its current campaign on this referendum is registered with SIPO just like any NGO campaign of this nature. It is wrong to confuse the two. Perhaps it is deliberate but it is wrong either way.

On the legislation before us, the legislation that the Government has produced allows for a woman to decide to end her pregnancy if she decides she does not want to go ahead with that pregnancy up to 12 weeks into it. That is ten weeks from conception. It allows for the termination of pregnancies after that on the grounds that there may be a serious risk to her life or health, or in the case where the baby she is carrying will not survive as a result of a fatal foetal abnormality. It does not provide for the termination of pregnancies beyond viability and that is in the heads. There is an important point that we need to make and understand, which is that if there is not a yes vote, there will be no legislation at all. If there is not a Yes vote, things will remain exactly as they are now. There will be no legislation. Women who are victims of rape, who are pregnant as a result of incest or who are just children themselves will not be able to get the help they need in this country. Those who are advocating a No vote need to explain why they would turn their backs on those women and give them the cold shoulder. That is what a No vote would mean.

I never mentioned Amnesty International.

Yes, he did.

I said Amnesty Ireland. Excuse me, listen. I mentioned Amnesty Ireland. It is fine for the Taoiseach. The Minister wants to hide. This is not a personal attack at all but a Minister in the Government proposing this legislation will not debate it. He chose not to answer me on that and I did not assume at all that the referendum was over. While head 4 of the general scheme says that the life of the unborn child cannot be ended once it has reached viability, there is no evidence of where this will be set. To understand that, I suggest that the Taoiseach reads the definitions contained in the general scheme. Even more disturbing is the fact that, directly following head 4, provision is made in head 5 to nullify or cancel out the prohibitions contained in head 4. There is utter confusion. This clearly demonstrates that all of the claims the Taoiseach and his Ministers are making about protecting the child once it reaches viability are an absolute nonsense and are not worth the paper they are written on. The Taoiseach and the Minister, Deputy Harris, know that. The Taoiseach and I know that it is simply one more tactic that is being used by this Government to disguise the extreme nature of the proposal. Will the Taoiseach be honest with the people for once in this debate and admit that post repeal, if it happens, absolutely no guarantees can be given on prohibition of abortion in either six, seven, eight or nine months? That is the fact.

Viability, the point at which a baby is viable outside of the womb, is a clinical judgment.

It is not as simple as just saying a certain number of weeks so that has to be a clinical judgement for the doctors concerned taking into account the gestation, the size of the foetus and the weight. Taking those three things into account, the two doctors - there must be two doctors, both of whom are on the specialist register, to certify a termination beyond 12 weeks - will make the judgment as to whether or not the pregnancy has reached viability. A pregnancy can only be terminated after 12 weeks if two doctors, both of whom are on the specialist register, determine that there is a serious risk to the life or health of the mother and that the pregnancy is not viable. If it has reached the point of viability, a compassionate early delivery occurs and every effort is made to save the life of the baby at that point as well as the life of the mother.

The legislation being put forward by the Government is not extreme. It is considerably more conservative than the situation in the UK or the Netherlands. It is very similar to the law in Germany. One individual I met on the doorstep last night was a woman from Germany who explained to me how it works there. It is very similar to what we have proposed where there is a cooling-off period of 72 hours, which gives the woman concerned a crucial period in which to consider other options and avail of counselling. This is a much better situation than the current one where people acquire the pills over the Internet without medical support or counselling.