Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)

I am raising one aspect of the ten-year blood scandal saga, which is as scandalous as any of the others with which we are familiar. It is the failure to inform some blood donors that they had tested positive for hepatitis C, which precluded them from protecting other members of their family and loved ones, and from seeking treatment in a timely manner. In other words people with a highly infectious disease were stopped from seeking treatment, which could have prevented their illness from deteriorating and also protecting members of their family.

Although this was known for some time it was not until Donor L initiated court action that the full implications of this scandal became known and were widely discussed. At that time it became clear that Donor L was not the only one involved and there were possibly another 27 people who had not been informed. Both Positive Action and Transfusion Positive expressed concern that there were many cases of people who had not been informed. This among other matters prompted the Minister into promising an inquiry into this aspect, which is just one part of the long-running blood scandal.

For reasons, the details of which are far too arcane for me to cover in the short time available to me, no inquiry took place. At least one reason for this was that interests within the BTSB, the body to be examined and investigated, did not want it for a variety of reasons. I do not even understand why it was consulted or asked and it is beyond understanding as to why the Minister succumbed to its wishes. The only explanation is that there is an unhealthy overlap between the Minister's electoral interests, the Southern Health Board and the board of the Irish Blood Transfusion Service, and that this conflicts with the public interest. I would be interested to hear if the Minister has another reason for the failure to establish this inquiry.

The information made available to my colleague, Deputy Hogan, under the Freedom of Information Act gives cause for serious concern in this regard and also in regard to other matters which should form the subject matter of an inquiry. For instance why did both the BTSB and the expert group it set up to investigate the sites where blood testing should occur change their minds in favour of dual site testing to include Cork rather than the original decision which was single site testing in Dublin, which is more in line with international best evidence and experience. This is particularly surprising given the extremely poor record of the BTSB in any form of recording and communicating of information with others and even within the board itself. The Cork dimension seems to have constrained the Minister and resulted in a less than optimal solution from the public point of view.

This is no longer a matter the Minister can let slide. I am not calling for a tribunal like any of the other tribunals we have had in the past into financial scandals, bribery or corruption. These are matters that can wait some months without impacting the public or the public interest. However, this is a matter on which the clock may be ticking in a real way for some people. People may have been infected who have not been informed and this must be investigated. While the Minister considered this matter sufficiently serious to order an inquiry, he has allowed it to be delayed for whatever reason.

I understand the Minister is now suggesting this matter might now be better investigated after the Commissions of Investigation Bill has been processed through the Houses of the Oireachtas. This is rubbish. It is totally unacceptable to postpone an inquiry, which may be a matter of life and death for some people, to wait for a Bill that has not even been read once in the House. It represents yet another unacceptable delaying tactic.

I am aware of the seriousness of this allegation: it is criminal to delay any further. The Minister must establish an independent inquiry now regardless of whose toes he steps on. He owes it to those who have been damaged over the years by the omissions, actions or inactions of those who have managed or mismanaged the blood supply on behalf of the State. He also owes it to those who will give or receive blood tomorrow or who will need it in the future and to those who will depend on the existence of a stable, efficient, well-managed and well-resourced blood supply and a service in which we can all have confidence. While the inquiry is outstanding no such confidence can exist in the blood supply.

See this speech in context