Mr. Tony O'Brien:

The point the Deputy makes is very well founded. We are working with the State Claims Agency to take a different approach, particularly the issue to which the Deputy refers, the catastrophic birth injury which typically gives rise to some of the largest settlements. Historically and, to some extent, currently, part of the valuation of a claim is about the services to be provided following the catastrophic incident and their adequacy. Through our primary care and disability services divisions and in discussions with the State Claims Agency, we are working to become increasingly proactive in addressing these health care needs, notwithstanding the fact that there may be the prospect of litigation or it is in train. Fundamentally, irrespective of litigation, we are the health and social care service of the State and need to be proactive in meeting these health care needs, however they arose. There is a view that our role and that of the State Claims Agency will be influenced by this, but most importantly, it can make the consequences of an adverse event less traumatising than they might otherwise be by building a better relationship between the local health service and the parents who suffered the event. I have to admit and acknowledge do so freely that historically it has not been the hallmark of the way things have been done and that this has led to very long running, long outstanding high value claims by people who have suffered not only the consequences of an adverse event but also a damaged relationship with the health care system in the interim.

On the small print, it is my understanding we have not formally gone to print. As we are looking at a PDF, the text is fractionally smaller than it will be in print. If we have not gone to print, we will increase-----