Mr. Jim Breslin:

I dealt with this issue in my opening remarks. The Minister's officials did not advise against this course of action. Rather, we worked on it with him. I acknowledge that the Deputy is reporting what has been stated by others, but, as I set out at the start of the meeting, the advice from officials was that women would present to their GPs because of the degree of anxiety that had been caused. Women were ringing the helpline to say that and to ask for the State to pay for out-of-cycle testing. We were faced with a situation whereby some women would be able to afford to pay for private testing but others would not. The decision was made in a rapidly developing situation. We agreed with the IMO that a fee would be paid to GPs for the sampling. In quite a high proportion of cases, women met their GPs, had a conversation and arrived at the conclusion that they did not need another test. The programme put in place was of great benefit in terms of reassuring people. Some women, in consultation with their GPs, decided to have another test. In fairness, at that point many people in addition to civil servants and the Minister, such as commentators and people directly affected by the controversy, believed it was the right thing to do. In trying to respond to the anxiety which existed, it would have been just as big a mistake to be totally dispassionate and hard headed and decide there was no need for the measures. It was decided that the programme would be reviewed after three months. As I mentioned, once we had the benefit of the Scally report, which was of reassurance in regard to laboratory standards, the Minister decided to bring the programme to an end.