Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

Mr. O'Brien was asked on the "Today with Sean O'Rourke" programme about the concerns raised in 2008 by Dr. David Gibbons and Dr. Sam Coulter-Smith. Dr. Gibbons and other scientists subsequently resigned because their concerns were ignored and dismissed. When that was put to Mr. O'Brien, he said that he had addressed those concerns in the final contract before it was awarded to Quest Diagnostics. Will the witness describe how he addressed those concerns? What was written into the contract? If Mr. O'Brien was prepared to address those concerns, why was that not indicated to the scientists at the time, instead of forcing their resignation?

He subsequently said he was happy with the standards applied by Quest Diagnostics. Mr. O'Brien must have been happy with the standards applied by CPL in Austin, Texas, as well, because he awarded it the contract. However, CPL is the company that was successfully sued by Ms Vicky Phelan. It settled with her for €2.5 million. Why would the company have settled with her if there was not a difficulty? I would like a brief answer.

I have read the press release from the Academy of Clinical Science and Laboratory Medicine on cervical screening. It has called on the Minister for Health to publish the results of the 2014 audit. When I asked the Minister in the Dáil last night to do that, he said there were no results of the audit - there were just individual reports for individual women. I spoke to a friend of mine who is a scientist about this today. She said that would be extraordinary because every audit has to have at least an introduction, the basis on which the audit was carried out, why it was carried out, what triggered it and what the terms of reference were. That is the very least. An audit will not just have Margaret's results, Ruth's results and Bríd's results and a description of how they have been looked at. There has to be a description and a report back. We are looking for that to be published. I echo the call by the academy for the 2014 audit to be published. I would like Mr. O'Brien to comment.

When the State Claims Agency, and I think it was Mr. Gleeson, was alerted that there was a claim made by Ms Vicky Phelan, Mr. O'Brien said he did not know anything about it until last Friday. I do not believe him. I do not believe that the Minister did not know. Other people might believe Mr. O'Brien but I doubt it. I think there are thousands of people out there who do not believe Mr. O'Brien. There may not be a paper trail or a smoking gun, an email or anything else but there could have been a conversation. Did Mr. Gleeson keep this to himself as a secret or did he discuss it verbally with anybody else? Would Mr. Gleeson get information like that, in a position of responsibility, and keep it all to himself? If Mr. O'Brien, as the head of the HSE, did not know until last Friday, he must be hopping mad. He must be looking for heads to roll over this. If he is not, I wonder why. I think anybody else would. I have one more quick question.