John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

It is strange that it is only now that this question is being addressed by the two Departments. No one challenged Dr. Braiden on her opening remarks, in which we states, "The board sought guidance from [Mr. Ó Donnchú's Department] on the approach to determining, setting and paying these removal expenses and was advised that the board ought itself interpret the wording in the sanction letter." It would appear, if this statement is correct, that advice was asked for and the response from the Department was that the board itself interpret it. When it is now raised as a specific point - it is not that it has nothing to do with Mr. Rainbird but he happens to be here - it is the issue of the Department giving guidelines to boards to ensure their compliance. For the Department to say the board itself should interpret the matter is at least a little odd in view of the fact that Dr. Braiden was attempting to get advice from Revenue, from, I presume, some accountancy firm and from the Department on the payment of this removal expense. Is it any wonder what we are reading in the newspapers today and in the special reports from the HSE, if the Department and DPER do not engage with these agencies to set down the thinking from the Department to which they are responsible?

I doubt if we will resolve it because there seems to be something of a dash for cover here. Dr. Braiden has one position. I understand that Mr. Quigley's Department was not consulted and Mr. Ó Donnchú states his Department was not consulted. I would ask the Departments, between themselves, to clarify it because guidance is needed on such issues. People ask for guidance from Revenue. They ask for guidance from the Department to which they report. It is a nonsense to come here this morning to state that this was not clarified for the gallery. I would merely ask that the Departments would clarify these matters for every other board and agency. I would ask Mr. Quigley for a copy of the advice that his Department gave on the interpretation of the removal, if it was in writing.