Reform of the island’s abortion laws moved a step closer this week.

The Legislative Council granted the bill a second reading.

But early hopes that they would also be able to take the detailed clauses stage at Tuesday’s sitting failed to materialise after a number of witnesses were called to give evidence and opinions.

Three of those were called by Bishop Peter Eagles, who was the only member of the upper chamber to vote against the second reading.

The Bishop has also, controversially, tabled a number of amendments to impose greater restrictions on the proposed reform.

Those amendments have angered many in the pro-choice camp as similar moves were defeated in the elected chamber, the House of Keys.

In addition, the Bishop’s actions have led to calls for the issue of whether he should be allowed to vote, or even sit, as a member of the Legislative Council and Tynwald, to be revisited.

The Bill as it stands will allow abortion upon request up to 14 weeks, and for prescribed reasons - including health, serious social concern and serious impairment - in the 15-24-week period, as well as set out the very restricted circumstances in which it could take place after 24 weeks.

However, the Bishop has tabled amendments changing those times so abortion upon request would be up to 12 weeks and for the prescribed reasons between 13-22 weeks.

He will also seek to remove one of the provisions that would permit late abortions when there was a substantial risk that, if the child was born alive, it would ’suffer a serious impairment which is likely to limit both the length and quality of the child’s life’.

Both of these issues have already been covered by the House of Keys, which approved the bill by 22 votes to two, after weeks of exhaustive deliberation.

But the Bishop, who voted to give the Bill a first reading when it arrived at the Legislative Council for a first reading, said: ’The Keys did speak clearly, but not with a single, unanimous voice.’

He repeated his concerns that the focus had concentrated mainly on the rights of the woman and protecting her life, with not as much attention given to the needs and rights of the foetus.

’My question remains as to whether we have given due regard to both of those lives. Not both sides of the question, but both lives involved.’

The vote to grant a second reading - endorsing the principles of the bill - was 8-1 in favour, with only the Bishop against.