The Taoiseach has exercised his prerogative. He promised to hold a referendum to regularise the position on abortion before the 1997 general election. He repeated that promise to the Independent TDs on which this government has relied for support.
The fifth and, probably, final referendum to qualify the equal right to life of the mother and the unborn in Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution is to be held on March 6th. And the Tánaiste has not demurred.
Now that the campaign is under way, it is fair to say that if Mr Ahern has kept his promise on abortion, Ms Harney has gone back on her word . The Government is aware that the two Trinity College students may yet appeal their case to the Supreme Court. But the Taoiseach reckons it will not be his fault if a stay is put on the poll. He is honouring his commitment to the Pro-Life Campaign and the Independent TDs to hold the referendum - irrespective of the outcome.
The Tánaiste's position is different. Her support for the Government's proposal to row-back on the X case, by removing the threat of suicide as a ground for abortion in this State, was at first conditional. Ms Harney warned in the Dáil that it would be unwise to proceed finally to a referendum unless sufficientlly broad, middle-ground support for the proposition was apparent. It clearly is not. Is she allowing it to proceed now because the latest opinion poll has given the Progressive Democrats a reasonable chance of being re-elected into government with Fianna Fáil?
So, for the fifth time in almost 20 years, the people are being asked to define a position on a most divisive political, legal, medical, social, ethical and moral issue. The main aim of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment of the Constitution (Protection of Human Life in Pregnancy) Bill is to distinguish between the physical and mental health of a pregnant woman by outlawing the threat of suicide as a ground for abortion. In a week when a depressed woman ended her life by way of assisted suicide in Dublin, who will argue that the threat of suicide does not predicate a genuine medical condition?
The Adelaide Hospital Society makes an interesting contribution to the debate in its submission to the Government published in today's editions of this newspaper. It believes that the thinking behind the proposed amendment appears to imply that women would feign a suicidal condition in order to obtain an abortion; that the profession of psychiatry would collude with this; and that psychiatrists might also be incompetent to assess the risk to the life of such patients. It concludes that the proposal poses a series of major threats and concerns in respect of women's healthcare, making it "profoundly discriminatory against women".
These are serious judgments from a reputable hospital society. They are not the only reasons, however, why this abortion referendum should be rejected. What seemed like an honest compromise on abortion, has not produced a consensus. The eschewing of legal definitions in the text must bring it back to the courts. This Irish solution is grounded in the clearest hypocracy. A blind eye will be turned officially to the 6,000 women who travel to Britain each year for abortions. In these circumstances, it is wiser to vote No.