Dr. Gabriel Scally:

Those are good points. I do not believe that CervicalCheck had the capacity in terms of the quantum of staff nor the skill mix. Deputy Donnelly mentioned Dr. Flannelly. She worked on this two days per week. She was a colposcopist, yet this programme was heavily based on cytopathology. CervicalCheck had no in-house cytopathology expertise, which was a difficulty. It is a public health programme, yet there was no consistent public health input. That would have avoided some of the problems with the construction of the audit. All of that left CervicalCheck weak in the contracting and tendering arena. Mr. McQuillan might comment on its capacity in that regard, but it looked to me to be light as well. CervicalCheck did not manage these contracts. The contracts should have been actively managed. CervicalCheck was a passive recipient of what the laboratories chose to give it. That is my summary. CervicalCheck needs the capacity to manage contracts actively.

There is a positive. For a long time on behalf of the Department of Health, Mr. McQuillan and I have been examining the public health system and the organisation of public health medicine in the State. The situation has not been good. That public health weakness is to the detriment of health and health services in many ways. However, I am pleased that actions are now being taken to strengthen them. I hope that these important public health programmes will operate within a staffing structure that can actively manage them on public health principles and deliver maximum benefit for the population.