Mr. Tony O'Brien:

Portlaoise is fully implemented in that regard already.

On the issue of inquests, obviously where there is to be in inquest, that is a matter of statute and the inquest must proceed. As Dr. Crowley has said, in the past - and I do mean the past - there was a culture whereby the point at which a medical negligence or other claim against the HSE or the State was initiated had an impact on relationships and the ordinary process of engagement. This came into particularly sharp focus in the context of persons suffering from narcolepsy who may have that condition as a result of a vaccination process, where there was a suggestion that certain supports would be provided only to persons who were not engaged in legal action. I intervened at that time to make it absolutely clear that the relationship between the HSE and its patients or clients must not in any way be affected by whether individuals had or had not initiated legal action. In the past, as Dr. Crowley has said, that was an event that occasionally interrupted the normal process but that is no longer the case and should never have been the case.

On the use of freedom of information requests, the Freedom of Information Act should never be something that patients have to rely on. I am familiar with the fact that Mark and Róisín Molloy had issues in that regard. When I met them with Ian Carter last year, we ensured that they received every piece of documentation that was connected with them. The method we used was that anything that had their name on it or the name of their late son, Mark, was provided to them at that point. It should have been provided sooner. It is absolutely clear that patients are entitled to their information, to information relating to them or to information relating, in this case, to their late children. That is very clear.

I hope that I have not overlooked any of the questions posed.