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

That is what I am really getting at. The man in Salford in Manchester was conducting tests for nine months before there was mention of the second cytoscreener. That is when MedLab Pathology got in contact with the Irish National Accreditation Board, INAB. INAB was not in any way aware of the Manchester laboratory until the application was received for the second employee. Deputy Harty mentioned the number of people who worked in the laboratory. Is there any scope for practitioners to carry out tests before they are accredited? Could Deputy Durkan start doing tests and receive accreditation when he got round to looking for it? My apologies to the Deputy. That does not seem to make any sense. For instance, in all of the contracts the State has concluded for the provision of any screening, the guidelines and precursor documents require the meeteing of the International Organisation for Standardisation, ISO, standard. We have spoken about equivalence between the ISO standard and that of the College of American Pathologists, CAP, to which we will get back in the future. It seems a bit handy that they are now equivalent. If the contract for the provision of services specifically states the practitioner has to be ISO or CAP-accredited, how could there be a situation where somebody performs tests and then receives accreditation afterwards? If a person opens a laboratory and is operational for several months before he or she receives accreditation, surely it is a breach of contract and standards?