Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I had to leave, so if I ask a question that has already been asked, the witnesses should not feel the need to answer it. I can check back on the record.

I want to know about the recruitment of the 52 sonographers. We have already heard at this committee extensive evidence on the need to access scans for the purpose of detecting anomalies, dating and so on, so we know it is very important. I am conscious that Dr. Holohan said some of the work in preparation for a referendum has been done, and that is to be welcomed. However, on the flip side, none of this will be possible or easy unless we have the staff to do it.

Could the witnesses give us a timeline for the 52 sonographers? The witnesses will know as well as I do that the 20-week scans are screening scans. I would not ask the witnesses to take my word for it but, as the consultants in this area have told us, it is not necessarily possible to make a decision as to who will need a scan because it is a screening scan and one needs to screen to get the information. In the meantime, and pending the recruitment of the 52 sonographers, 140 midwives and all the other staff that would probably just bring us up to a fairly basic level of service, how many women access the anomaly scan, how is it decided they will need one, and what percentage of women need it? Since it is a screening scan, we will take as a given that all pregnant women should have access to it. What percentage of women are missing out? This will have serious implications in the event of the repeal of the eighth amendment.

I will ask one final question because I do not wish to delay any more than I have to. My colleague, Deputy O'Brien, asked a question about recording those women who sought access to a termination under the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act but who were not granted one and did not engage in the review process. One of the speakers - it might have been Dr. Holohan - alluded to the need for us to have evidence, and evidence must inform policy.

The Department of Health is fairly clear that collection of that information would not come under its remit. My view is that it clearly would come under the HSE's remit, not Mr. Woods's personal remit, that it would be the HSE's job. It is quite worrying that the information is not being recorded.

Perhaps Mr. Woods could explain to us why he feels it is not important to record that information and who he feels should be recording it. The Department has given its clear view that it is not a policy matter so it is not for it to record it. My view is that it clearly comes within the remit of the HSE. Mr. Woods can correct me if I am wrong on this, but I think we can all agree that the recording of this information is important. If it is not currently being recorded, and I suspect it is not, perhaps Mr. Woods might be able to tell us who within the HSE will have responsibility for recording it.

In the event that the eighth amendment is repealed and expanded access to services is brought in, and in order to be able to develop services further, we will need evidence, and we are starting from a fairly bad place if we are already neglecting to collect some of that evidence.