Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I am moving on to that matter. I appreciate everything the whistleblower has said. We would not be here discussing it without the whistleblower, who has done an enormous service not just to Grace but in highlighting the issues that have come to light as a result of this over a period of years. In addition to that, the whistleblower, who has written to us, was personally involved in this case and has more information than anybody else. As a result of the work of the whistleblower not solely through this committee and the previous one but through other people in the Oireachtas, this issue has been highlighted very extensively resulting in the Oireachtas setting up a commission of investigation - the Farrelly commission. That is how the Oireachtas has decided that this matter is to be dealt with from here on in. The commission is commencing its public sessions next week and I do not think it is appropriate for the Committee of Public Accounts to engage in any significant discussions in parallel with the commission of investigation established by the Oireachtas. That is one issue.

The second issue about which I am concerned is the fact that there is no reference in the correspondence we received today that the service provider, the employer of the people concerned, has been to the High Court on this matter. I will read into the record page five of the Deloitte report. It is the executive summary. I could read out a lot of it but I will just read out this particular point. Before I make that point, Deloitte made the point in the report that much of the documentation that was supplied, most of which was from the HSE and some of which was from the service provider, was included in the report but that Deloitte had not substantiated the information from either source. There is information from both sides that Deloitte did not feel was its job to substantiate but was given it and included it. Everything in that is not from Deloitte and we all agree on that. The paragraph on page five of the executive summary states:

In April 2017 the HSE and the Service Provider agreed a funding position for 2016 and a payment schedule for 2017. Subsequently, the High Court approved settlement terms on 27 April 2017 which included a care settlement of €600,000 for past care and €120,484 per annum for the individual’s care going forward. The HSE contacted the Service Provider on 19 May 2017 to update the previously agreed payment schedule and payment of the €600,000 was made on 2 June 2017.

This matter has been before the High Court. The settlement figure and the cost of care has been accepted by the service provider and the HSE and has been approved by the High Court. We are not revisiting a matter that has been approved by the High Court at the request of the service provider and the HSE. It is not our job to unpick a High Court-approved agreement. As Chairman, I am saying that we will not be going there. If the Parliamentary Legal Adviser tells us it is safe for the Oireachtas to consider unpicking an approved agreement in the High Court, well and good. If the Parliamentary Legal Adviser takes the view that it is appropriate given that the Oireachtas has set up a commission of investigation, all of which should examine the issues the whistleblower has highlighted, our response should be to forward the whistleblower's letter to the commission established by the Oireachtas to look into this matter. I am making it very clear that we are not unpicking a High Court settlement and we are not trespassing over a commission established by the Oireachtas. The letter in front of us makes no reference whatsoever to the High Court agreement. It is a valid letter.

It is a great letter, but it ignores the fact the employer organisation of the people who wrote to us has an agreement in the High Court. I am just saying we have to take that into account and I propose we send it off.