Séamus Healy (Tipperary South, Workers and Unemployed Action Group) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the witnesses and thank them for the presentations. It is quite clear that the system that deals with medical negligence is not fit for purpose. I welcome, in particular, the presentation from the Irish Medical Organisation because it reflects, to a large extent, something I have said for quite some time. As late as last week I mentioned the cuts of €4 billion to the health service, the reduction in staff of 13,000 and the 2,000 beds taken out of the system, while during the same period there was a significant increase in activity. Staff are under pressure every hour of every day. My local hospital is working at something like 120% capacity on an ongoing basis. That is the background which feeds into this area.

I also welcome the reference by the IMO to open disclosure and apologies to patients and their families arising from adverse incidents. Does that represent, from the IMO's point of view, an acceptance of a legal duty of candour? Would it support such a requirement in the future? Would the other organisations present support the introduction of a legal duty of candour? The nub of the question is the adversarial nature of the process from the very outset. Patients and their families are kept in the dark, misinformed and misled. Openness, apology, immediate action and a legal duty of candour are key to making some attempt to solve this problem.

Many patients who have been involved in medical negligence are frustrated from the outset by the nature of the procedures and the lack of timeliness and openness in the process. If there was more openness and disclosure, and apologies were issued where necessary, that would be very important to the patients who have suffered adverse effects. It would be effective from the point of view of the clinicians, hospitals and institutions involved. I ask the witnesses to address the questions of openness, candour and speedy action.

That some of these cases can go on for years is very difficult for the patients involved. I believe it also gives rise to significantly increased financial costs eventually. Will the various witnesses address that area which I believe is key to beginning to solve this problem? As I said at the outset, it is an area that is simply not fit for purpose.