Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Thursday, 28 January 2016

Public Accounts Committee

Business of Committee

10:00 am

Photo of John DeasyJohn Deasy (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not want to repeat myself, but we had discussed a report which was sent to the Committee of Public Accounts by the HSE in which it said that a formal apology had been made to the birth mother and to the client of the organisation. The Irish Examinercovered the story and the committee received a two-page rebuttal from the HSE which denied that an apology had not been given. It is clear to everybody who has been dealing with this matter that apologies were not given. Is that a small thing? If one considers it a small thing to lie to an Oireachtas committee or the Oireachtas and to fabricate events after the fact, fine. However, I do not believe it is a small thing. It should have consequences. That it is continuing to operate along that line of action is deeply troubling when one considers that this is a State agency with a responsibility to these people who are mentally disabled and who were placed in the foster home concerned.

The Chair suggested that the matter be brought to the attention of Mr. Tony O'Brien in the HSE. I am pretty sure that Mr. O'Brien is well aware of the circumstances and what his organisation has done. It appears that the entire organisation is holding the line with regard to the behaviour of some individuals within the organisation. The question must be asked about where, beyond that level, is the appropriate office to which this must be sent. I find it hard to believe that the Department of Health and the Secretary General's office would not have an opinion regarding this behaviour. Since this is the last meeting of this committee, perhaps the clerk would send this letter to the Department requesting that it contact the HSE about the matter.

When one reads the letter, one must think about the individuals involved. The charge has been made that there were efforts to discredit and damage the professional reputations of the people who worked in the Waterford Intellectual Disability Association. That is a serious charge, and I believe it is something that did happen. Two individuals within the HSE were, according to the HSE, supposed to have made those apologies. They have contacted their HSE bosses to tell them they did not make the apologies. The HSE ignored this and continued to hold the line that the apologies have been given. This is inexcusable. The two individuals in the HSE have been badly compromised by the organisation they work for. One cannot imagine how they must feel today with this matter being discussed again. People will recognise their posts, who they are and the kind of position they have been put in. I agree with the two individuals who have written to the committee today about their version of events, but there must be some understanding of how the two HSE staff are feeling right now, having been used by the organisation they work for.