Michael Harty (Clare, Independent) | Oireachtas source

This morning we will hear from Dr. Gabriel Scally and Dr. Karin Denton on the report on the scoping inquiry into the CervicalCheck screening programme which was published last month. On behalf of the joint committee, I welcome Dr. Scally and Dr. Denton to give their evidence.

By virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the committee. However, if they are directed by it to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable. I also advise that any opening statement submitted to the committee may be published on its website after the meeting.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

Deputy Stephen S. Donnelly is unable to attend the meeting because he is unwell. He has passed on his apologies.

Perhaps I might open the proceedings by asking Dr. Scally a number of questions. If a screening programme such as CervicalCheck is to have unavoidable false negatives reported, as is the case with all screening programmes, how can it be managed fairly and effectively without recourse to adversarial legal proceedings? Will Dr. Scally address the issue of the failure to openly disclose the audit findings as soon as they became known? Perhaps he might also expand on his statement that a commission of inquiry was not the best way to proceed.