Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)

I thank the Office of the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for the opportunity to address this very important matter. It concerns the ongoing tragedy for the parents, Brian and Rosemary, and the brothers, sisters and family of the late Frances Sheridan. It also has implications for the future conduct of inquests and highlights the need to bring forward the promised coroners' Bill.

There is an immediate need for the Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, to explain the State's attitude to the second inquest into the death of Frances Sheridan and the total contradiction between the position of the Attorney General on one hand and on the other the Health Service Executive and the State Claims Agency.

Frances Sheridan died in 2004 following her discharge from Cavan General Hospital. At her first inquest last year evidence showed that the full recorded facts of her condition, including an earlier appendix operation, were not known to those who attended her in Cavan General Hospital before her discharge and subsequent death.

At last year's inquest the coroner directed the jury to return a verdict of death by misadventure but they returned a verdict of death by natural causes. This caused consternation to the grieving Sheridan family and raised profound questions which have yet to be answered.

The Attorney General ordered a second inquest and this decision was warmly welcomed by the Sheridan family. They look forward to the full facts emerging at the second inquest.

Then, like a bolt from the blue this week, the Health Service Executive and the State Claims Agency have tried to prevent the second inquest from going ahead by challenging the position of the Cavan coroner, Dr. Mary Flanagan. They have argued that she should not preside at the second inquest, having already presided at the first. This is despite the fact the Attorney General' s direction to hold a second inquest was to the Cavan coroner, Mary Flanagan, herself.

The coroner was presented on Monday with a threat from the HSE and the State Claims Agency that they would take High Court action on Tuesday unless she voluntarily stood aside. It seems this threat was not carried out but a solicitor for the HSE and the State Claims Agency again submitted in the Coroner's Court on Wednesday that she should stand aside. This is quite extraordinary. Is there a precedent for this demand? Is it not the norm that where a second inquest is required the same coroner presides?

The HSE and the State Claims Agency are arms of the same State whose chief law officer ordered the second inquest. It is mind-boggling that they should now seek to prevent that second inquest from proceeding. Both of these agencies, as well as the Attorney General, are charged with protecting the interests of citizens. Why are they acting at cross purposes?

The grief of the Sheridan family has been compounded by the events of this week. In the words of their legal adviser: "Their grief could hardly be compounded further, but it seems the HSE has managed to do that". The Sheridan family's barrister also told the coroners court that it was inconceivable to them that the HSE should threaten a High Court injunction.

I echo the call of the Sheridan family for the Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children and her Cabinet colleagues here represented by the Minister of State, Deputy O'Malley, including the Minister for Finance, Deputy Cowen, to explain themselves and order an investigation into the handling of this case.

See this speech in context