Jim Daly (Cork South West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputies, who made very reasonable points. It is not the sanction but the finding that is appealed. Reference was made a number of times to a minor sanction but it is the finding, which is on a person's professional conduct and fitness to practise, which is very serious, that is appealed. A finding can impugn a person's professional good name. That brings up the level of seriousness notwithstanding the Deputy's concerns about the person's ability to access the High Court and the cost. I am not diminishing those issues but I want to give a bit of context. This is why the High Court is included.

There are two sides to the argument about costs. This is about trying to find a balance between the patient and the registrant, protecting the integrity of the healthcare system and the delivery of services to the patient and ensuring his or her rights are there and that the strictest and toughest standards are met at all levels. If someone does go to the High Court, the costs will be awarded to the employer in some cases. If someone has been wronged by his or her employer, one would expect the costs to be awarded. I cannot prejudge what will happen or what an outcome will be. Unions take a lot of these cases. The main thrust of what I am trying to say is that it is essentially the finding that is being challenged, which is never minor. There is no such thing as a minor finding when it involves fitness to practise and impugning someone's character and professional reputation as opposed to the sanction. The focus is not on the sanction.