A Chathaoirligh, it is not unusual to hear you rule frequently that it is not appropriate to comment on any investigation, inquiry or case while it is in process. Last Thursday I was watching the end of the Order of Business on the monitor in my office. I was absolutely shocked to see this practice abused by the Deputy Leader, Senator Ivana Bacik. She commented on the inquest in Galway into the death of Savita Halappanavar.

That question was dealt with at the time. She was acting as Leader on the day and responding to questions.

Fair enough.

Does the Senator have a question for the Leader?

Yes, I do have a question. Is it not fair that the same treatment is given to all Members as to the Deputy Leader? She commented without the inquest having been concluded.

She has a different role when she is acting as Deputy Leader of the House.

I also felt it was-----

Does the Senator have a question for the Leader?

It was an abuse of her role.

She abused her position as Deputy Leader to advance one side of the debate on abortion.

Are we dealing with today's Order of Business or last week's?

It is an important point.

We cannot have a discussion on this matter.

This must be said because we need an open debate.

Does the Senator have a question for the Leader?

Yes. I call for a fair debate on the abortion issue that is open to all sides, as advanced by Senators David Norris and Rónán Mullen. The Deputy Leader should not abuse her role-----

The word "abuse" is not right. I do not believe Senator Ivana Bacik abused her position and ask the Senator to withdraw it.

My point is made, but it was an abuse.

The Chair dealt with this issue last week.

Senator Fidelma Healy Eames should not claim that the Deputy Leader abused her position. That is ridiculous.

Why not? The Deputy Leader did.

She did not.

She did.

Does Senator Fidelma Healy Eames have a question for the Leader?