Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Wednesday, 22 May 2019

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Health

Quarterly Update on Health Issues: Discussion

Photo of Kate O'ConnellKate O'Connell (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome Mr. Reid and I wish him the best of luck in his job. His employment history demonstrates that he is a dedicated public servant. I hope he will deliver in his role for the people of Ireland. I agree with my colleague, Deputy Durkan, that many have failed in this same role before. I also believe we have political buy-in to the ten year Sláintecare plan. Some of us here sat on the committee that produced it. I also agree with Mr. Reid that buy-in is needed from the public and that confidence is a prerequisite. There will be a lack of confidence if it appears to the public that we are not in control of a budget and that there is not a steady hand on the reins. I wish Mr. Reid the very best in his new role.

I do not want to rehash some of the previous comments regarding governance. In many of the recent crises and scandals, or whatever word we use, however, there has been a constant narrative regarding a need for a change of governance structures. That has been the case not just in the Department of Health but also in other Departments. A new board is being appointed in the health service in June and that will represent the required change in governance structures. Governance has often been blamed for failings in the past. If the governance will now be right from June, there will be no excuse anymore in that regard, as far as I am concerned. I do not expect to have to come in then and listen to governance being blamed for whatever incidents might happen from June. I refer to there being a proper chain of command, the spokes on the wheel not being too far from the centre and there being appropriate accountability.

A number of eminent general practitioners, GPs, addiction specialists and consultant psychiatrists wrote a fairly clear letter in the newspapers during the week. I do not have it in front of me but it concerned the effects of the recreational use of cannabis. As the Minister is aware, I and the Chair spent much time working through the Bill that was before this committee a year or more ago. Despite the massive volume of legal advice to not proceed with the Bill, it somehow managed to proceed to the next Stage. I know it has now been halted by the absence of a money message. Eminent psychiatrists, GPs and addiction experts are stating one thing. It would be helpful if Mr. Reid would outline the difference between legalisation, decriminalisation and harm reduction. I really object to the word "medicinal" being used in respect of cannabis. It is a controlled drug. Until it gains evidence to justify the medicinal name, then we are just dealing with a schedule 1 drug.

My focus regarding this issue has always been on protecting our citizens. I also want to focus, however, on protecting our regulatory processes. No drug is allowed onto the market unless deemed safe by the Health Products Regulatory Authority, HPRA. It would never allow any drug get onto the market via a regulatory process that was circumvented for whatever reason. Doctors, in particular Dr. Walley, have spoken in the media about the prevalence of this issue in the business pages of newspapers and the push towards allowing investment in this area. The Minister is familiar with this area. He took the lead on the compassionate access programme and some 15 or 16 patients are benefiting from that scheme now. Given that level of take-up, we as legislators and people in charge of our health service have to stand back and ask questions.

If only 16 patients have been granted use of this product by the consultants allowed to prescribe it, why is there such a big push in the business world regarding legal changes in respect of this drug? We are in a precarious position as legislators. Those of us with a medical background feel strongly about big business being able to negate the existing body of evidence. That body of evidence underpins what was stated by medical professionals regarding this issue in newspapers and other media this week. I ask Mr. Reid to outline where we are on this topic. The message circulating at the moment seems to suggest that everyone is going to be legalising drugs. Parents are concerned, as are people who have experienced this issue with their children, teenagers and adolescents. They feel strongly about this matter.

I also want to address the issue of vaccination and the worrying decrease in the uptake of vaccines for measles, mumps and rubella. We have spoken about measles in recent months. That illness has rightly been the subject of publicity internationally and domestically. Measles is a serious illness which can cause life-altering conditions and even death. A number of GPs have told me that there is a huge upsurge in cases of mumps. I refer to mild forms of mumps. Children who have been vaccinated are presenting with symptoms that may be retrospectively recognised as a mild form of mumps. The HSE needs to work on education in this area.

Children who have been vaccinated and are exposed to mumps can be left deaf and have other complications throughout life. With respect to those parents who are responsible and make their informed decisions based on the evidence about their children's health, there is almost a belief, although perhaps I am reading it wrong, that if one vaccinates one's child, he or she will be grand but that is not the case. If one has a child who is immuno-compromised with cancer or who is simply vulnerable at a particular point or if one is an older person, if they get a measles or a mumps infection they can be very seriously ill and that can have lasting effects.

The Minister was doing some work with the Attorney General on the mandatory vaccination. If it was as easy to force everyone to vaccinate, this would have been done back in the day when Jenner discovered the smallpox vaccine. I agree with him that moves need to be made to prepare in the event of an epidemic to address what we should do if we were to end up in a situation such as in the United States where people are not allowed leave their homes or there are issues in airports. We need to prepare for the worst-case scenario. With respect to where we are on the issue of mandatory vaccination and bringing people along with us, based on my experience it is not a lack of information that results in people failing to vaccinate their children rather it is oversupply of the wrong information. People often make informed decisions but the information on which they base their decisions is not scientific. I am concerned when I hear views on this issue from people such as Andrew Wakefield, the discredited doctor, who apparently is currently dating Elle Macpherson. There is a celebrity element to this. Kim Kardashian's baby's birth by surrogate had a CBD theme. The Minister probably did not know that. He is probably too busy running the health service. A celebrity element is coming into issues that have a serious effect on our public health. We as legislators must be strong on this. If we let the Kardashians or Andrew Wakefield into the mix on this, issues in respect of which there has major investment in our universities and our institutions over the years can be diminished by a reality TV star, not into getting into the President of the United States while we are at the health committee. However, I feel strongly about this and about the impact of social media on people's health and bad information.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.