Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, RISE) | Oireachtas source

In respect of parliamentary questions, the witnesses said the first that CHI became aware of this was on foot of my parliamentary questions that were answered in July, but I had asked previous parliamentary questions where, to be generous, the answers were misleading, and one of them had been signed off by Dr. Okafor. What does that process look like? CHI received a question on 8 May, which was answered on 10 May, that asked whether "all implants used in spinal surgery for patients with spina bifida and spinal muscular atrophy across Temple Street and Crumlin Hospitals [were] appropriately licensed", and the answer stated that to the best of CHI’s knowledge, it was standard practice that they were all licensed appropriately. I must say, the phrase "to the best of our knowledge" caused me to raise an eyebrow and encouraged me to ask a second question rather than just accept it. The answer, which was signed off by Dr. Okafor, dated 12 July and submitted on 22 June, stated it was standard practice that all the implants were approved and licensed appropriately. How does it work that CHI tries to find out, goes to Temple Street, asks around and gets information back? What does that look like?