Alan Kelly (Tipperary, Labour) | Oireachtas source

Okay, fair enough. That is very honest of Mr. O'Brien.

Let us consider what Dignam said about the report. In 2009 the HSE set up the Devine inquiry to investigate the case of Grace, omitting the other 46 allegations. The Dignam report stated "the adoption of Terms of Reference by the HSE which led to this focus, means that the approach adopted to the Inquiry by the HSE was inadequate in all the circumstances." These inadequate terms of reference were designed by the designated person from the serious incident management team in line with procedure. This person was referenced previously in other evidence; his name is Ger Crowley. He helped set up the terms of reference for the Devine inquiry into the Grace case and was centrally involved.

He then retired from the HSE and set up Resilience Ireland. That organisation then got a contract to do a desktop review of the 46 others left out of the terms of reference of the Devine inquiry for which he was already involved in setting up the terms of reference. He subsequently retired, which is fine, and then was part of an organisation, as a director. He got the contract to do the work. He recommended a further review, that is, visiting the other 46 cases. Then, subsequently, his company got the contract to do this work. However, the Dignam report found that there was no reason not to get three quotes. Of course, the argument Mr. O'Brien made and will subsequently make after answering this question, I am sure, is that this was because the HSE was in a hurry etc. While the HSE might not have got three quotes - Mr. O'Brien outlined the culture that existed - did it get even one quote for the work? The Chair should note this is directly related to the evidence given at the time.