Kate O'Connell (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am sorry for missing the presentation as I was in the Chamber. I do not wish to repeat anything that has been said already. Following on from Deputy Louise O'Reilly's point about the scanning rate in Cork University Hospital and the incorrect data she received originally. To my mind that signifies something a lot more serious in that if one does not know what the rate of scanning is, that shows it is not high on the HSE's list of priorities. As was made very clear to us earlier by Professor Kenny, the knock-on effect of increasing sonography services has an effect on pre-natal care and neonatal care because the more one finds the more one has to fix. I find it exceptionally concerning that those responsible were not sure what was going on and therefore they could not say that it was on their radar if the facts and figures were not known and they had not anticipated what might be the knock-on effects of increasing the services. Perhaps I am wrong.

I do not wish to misquote Professor Kenny but I was shocked to hear that babies will die due to a lack of sonography in Ireland. I wrote it down as she said it so I think I am correct about what she said. In a civilised society and what is essentially a first world country it is difficult to believe that the lack of non-invasive procedures could have an impact on the live birth rate. How does she feel about that as an employee of the HSE? Does she think the women of this country have been failed?

It was stated that there was a failure of the governance structure at Cork University Hospital. Does Professor Kenny accept that? The year 2006 was mentioned. We cannot blame history for the problem as the structure is recent. The obstetrics and gynaecological services did not have a ring-fenced budget and, therefore, as we heard in great detail, the money was relocated to different areas. Does Professor Kenny accept that the governance structure in Cork University Hospital is a failure and that the mastership model is the way forward?

When it comes to the strategy itself, could the witnesses explain why nothing has been done for almost a year and could they outline the HSE's key priorities when it comes to the strategy? What I am trying to get at is whether they align with the clinicians and midwives we spoke to earlier on? With regard to the 13 of the 19 directors of midwifery who have been appointed, while that is a good thing I am a little concerned about a little bit being done in several places but nothing being done completely right. I am more of the opinion that one would fix A and then move on to B as opposed to doing a little bit here and there as I feel the value is lost. Perhaps I am wrong. Is that just the way it has ended up or is that what the HSE set out to do?

I cannot remember which of my colleagues referred to the appointment of a person to lead the national women and infants health programme. Is it the case that a lead has been appointed? If that has happened, have there been discussions on how the strategy will be implemented? We constantly hear about the success of the cancer strategy under Professor Keane and the late Professor Donal Hollywood. Is the HSE going about the maternity strategy in the same way or is it reinventing the wheel?

Other speakers have raised the issue, but I do not understand why the gynaecological strategy was omitted from the terms of reference. Even though we cannot turn back time it is really important that the committee is enlightened as to how that came about so perhaps if something arose in the future we might be able to mitigate against such omissions.