Colm Burke (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. The witnesses referred to 15 laboratories in the mid-1980s. My understanding is that there are now two laboratories in Ireland that do this work. Are there other laboratories doing other medical analysis that could take on some of this work if they got the staff? What is the position relating to laboratories overall in the country if we wanted to retain all of this work?

In order to retain the work, we would have to upskill people and ensure that we have an adequate number of individuals who are suitably qualified. A total of 60 people were redeployed as a result of the outsourcing. If we started a programme today to ensure that this many people would be sufficiently qualified, how long would it take us to ensure that we reached our target? Are there people conducting clinical analysis in other areas who could be switched with upskilling or must we start from the very beginning?

The witnesses talk about how higher-grade abnormalities should be identified in 95% of cases while all abnormalities should be identified in 90% of cases. I have seen different reports. I saw one, a document produced by Professor Brennan, which seems to indicate that his figures would vary somewhat from those of the witnesses. One of the issues that needs to be identified is the fact that the smear test - and the work done in this area - deals with that specific type of cancer; it does not identify other cancers. We need to get clarification as well on that because once a person got a clear smear result and even issues arose about which they were concerned, the immediate response was "Well, it can't be cancer. I've got a clear smear." Do we need to get an great deal more information out there to the effect that the smear test or even the HPV testing about which we are talking will not produce a finite result of 100%?

We are now in the area of litigation. If we take the figure of 95% of higher-grade abnormalities, what about the 5% where it is not identified? How do we deal with that from a litigation point of view? Last year, we paid out €300 million in claims through the State Claims Agency. For every €1 million paid out, there is €1 million less available to spend on healthcare. I am not taking from people affected by errors. Where genuine errors occur, people must be adequately compensated. All of the screening is not 100%. How do we now deal with this issue? I am not doubting the 95% but there are still 5% of cases we cannot and will not be able to identify.