I call Senator Norris and welcome him to his new group.

I thank the Leas-Chathaoirleach. I rise today to speak as a member of the Technical Group for the first time. It is slightly ironic that I am in the Technical Group because I am probably the biggest luddite in the House. I was very happy to accept the invitation extended by my very good friend and colleague, Senator Ivana Bacik. My principal motivation for joining it was that I thought it wrong that the Labour Party would be excluded from certain speaking rights because of its numbers. The House should consider the situation in that regard.

Senator Norris was always generous.

Yes, to a fault. For example, it is very important to examine the order in which Members are called on to speak. I accept that the Leas-Chathaoirleach is bound by the rules but it is completely unacceptable that people may sit here for three quarters of an hour and a member of another party then floats in, not having been here for the first forty-five minutes, and gets to contribute straight away. That is ridiculous. It would put manners on people if they were expected to be here, sit and listen to others and respect the Order of Business.

Neither the Cathaoirleach nor I have ever left the father of the House waiting.

I am not speaking of myself but, rather, making a general observation. I have never minded being here because I always find it very interesting to listen to what others have to say.

I welcome the Supreme Court's judgment which is interesting. It is remarkable that the entire seven judges agreed in this instance. I deplore the language used in the debate. Who are the "unborn"? Am I the "undead"? Is Dublin the "unLondon"? What does it mean? Why do they not face facts and call it what it is medically, namely, the foetus? I also object to the term "pro-life". I am pro-life; not pro-death. Who are these people to take over these labels for themselves?

Hear, hear.

Well said.

It is outrageous. There are significant difficulties for the Government ahead of the referendum. The first is that people will have to have explained to them the motivation and reasoning behind the period of 12 weeks because those on the other side will suggest it is free range abortion and so on. The public needs to be alerted to how this is simply facing the fact that nowadays young women can access abortion pills via the Internet and take them without medical supervision at great risk to their lives. These issues need to be explained in order that the public will know that it is not free range abortion.

We will have an opportunity to debate the legislation when it is brought before us.

Yes. We should be aware of the fact that the general public may take from the welcome Supreme Court judgment the idea that the foetus is now more vulnerable. That is what will be said. We need to be prepared to counter these arguments and-----

The Senator is entering into a debate on the matter.

I know, but we need to keep debating this sensitive issue because we need to have a fully informed debate on it.