Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

However, I do not charge by the hour. I thank the Chairman and will be as brief as I can. There are a few obvious issues. A fact of life we must address is that our legal system is adversarial in its nature.

A more open approach and honest and candid sort of disclosure in these discussions will take a mindset change. It is not just a few of us in a committee room. It is embedded in our adversarial legal system.

Obviously we need to look at it in the context of a duty of care that must be provided by the State in terms of public hospitals - the duty of care provided by those carrying out procedures on behalf of the State in our public hospitals. There is also the MPS, whose representatives made a presentation here last week. I suggest to the Chairman that we should contact the MPS to seek clarity on certain issues raised today because we did not have time to do so last week.

On the issue of open disclosure and the duty of candour, I believe Ms Courtney summarised it very well in the context of her experiences with her daughter Bríd. Many people feel frustration even at the initial stages to get the basic information from the HSE and medical professionals merely to find out what happened before they ever contemplate taking a case. There is a secretive culture instilled in the HSE and medical professionals that the patient or the person who is acting on behalf of the patient is the last person to know what happened. That is just beginning to change now. We talk about the HSE becoming more accountable in terms of discussions with its clients - patients of doctors acting on behalf of the HSE. It is something that will take a long time. It is evident that we have a long way to go. Before we ever go down the litigation route, there must be a more open approach by the HSE and those acting on behalf of the HSE.

When we get to the further issue of cases, the State Claims Agency now acts on behalf of the State on the issue. It is promoting mediation, for example. However, of approximately 460 cases it handled in 2013, only about 19 or 20 were concluded through mediation and the rest of them ended up going through the adversarial legal route. The losers in that are those who are seeking compensation or redress and also the State which often picks up the tab. The money that is being wasted through the adversarial approach ends up coming from the taxpayer and not going to people who need it.

We need to see if we can do something and we would appreciate advice from the representatives of the various organisations present. How do we make it more efficient and streamlined? In whose interest is it to try to keep it as it is at present? We need to be honest; the legal representatives will be paid. Those acting for the plaintiff might find it more difficult at times, but those acting on behalf of the defendant will always be paid. The only people really throwing the dice in this are sometimes people acting on behalf of the plaintiff, but the defendant's lawyers will always be paid. We should try to encourage the HSE and the State Claims Agency, given the mentality of the legal profession-----