Neasa Hourigan (Dublin Central, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for coming before the committee. I will start with that issue as to where this sits within the system, which I know can be a bit dry in terms of what is actually happening. It is striking that there is a lot of frustration in the room. Usually, when we have advocates for a particular area come in, and they all agree on the shortfall or the shortcomings in our approach or our resourcing, often what we get back from the Department, whether it does it or not, is "We recognise the shortfall and we are working on it". Sometimes the Department does not work on it, but at least it recognises it. It is striking that that is not the case with this, in that the Department seems quite happy with the way things are going. I am curious about that.

As to where this sits and the clinical advisory group and, in general, the national heart programme, NHP, on its website it has information to the effect that it created subgroups to identify what would be principal areas for operation in the next few years. What was the witnesses' interaction with that system? Have they had any interaction? Have they seen any reports from those subgroups? Within the NHP, is that a front-facing thing? Is the NHP giving the witnesses information as to how that is working?