Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)

The second matter is an issue in which people are far more interested. The Minister for Health and Children has asked the chief executive officer of the HSE to request a report on the circumstances that led to the decisions of the HSE to suspend breast radiology services at the hospital, to place a consultant radiologist on administrative leave and to initiate a clinical review of breast radiology services. That report, which was carried out by a review group led by Ms Ann Doherty of the National Hospitals Office, has been completed and submitted to the chief executive officer of the HSE and the Department of Health and Children. The Minister has also asked for a report from the board of the HSE on the management of all events starting from and subsequent to those decisions. That report, which was produced by Mr. John Fitzgerald, has been completed and will be examined by the board at a meeting on Thursday of this week.

A clinical report, conducted by Dr. Ann O'Doherty — the other report was produced by Ms Ann Doherty — has been the subject of legal issues raised by some of the parties named in it. The case has not yet been resolved to the satisfaction of legal advisers to the various parties. The Minister for Health and Children will publish those reports as quickly as possible.

Being from that constituency and knowing some of the people involved, I agree, as do other Deputies in the constituency, it is important that these reports are brought into the public domain as quickly as possible to find out what happened, how it happened and, as an exercise in accountability, make sure it does not happen again. We should also make sure that the best possible clinical support is available for the purposes of seeing how the treatment can be progressed and dealt with, hopefully, successfully.

I made the point that, while Deputy Kenny can give his opinion on the tribunal, score a few political points and get some advantage if possible — that is the cut and thrust of politics and we all understand that — he is not authorised by the Oireachtas to evaluate the evidence. It is the job of the three judges to evaluate the evidence.

Regarding the suggestion that the Taoiseach is in some way responsible for delays, the corollary of that argument is that he has less rights than other citizens who come before the tribunal in the event that issues of substance arise, based on his legal advice. Incidentally, Deputy Gilmore suggested yesterday that one of the issues upon which the Taoiseach was seeking legal advice was that he was depriving the tribunal of a report by Mr. Paddy Strong, an adviser to his legal team on certain matters that arose in the tribunal. That is not correct. The tribunal has the report. The issue is that the tribunal has suggested it wants to go behind that privileged relationship and seek the communications between the legal advisers and the expert they employed to help deal with the Taoiseach's side of the story regarding that matter. That is an issue of substance.

I remind the Deputy that when Judge Mahon had a contretemps with the Taoiseach's counsel last Friday, he made the point that it is open to any person before the tribunal to seek legal redress in the courts on any issue. The tribunal does not in any way regard that as a wrong thing to do or a course of action that compromises it in any way. In fact, it would advise such action should any of the people before it feel strongly about any particular matters where procedures and fair play are involved because, unlike some Members of this House, it wants to see an objective assessment and evaluation of all the evidence, with the full rights and entitlements of all those before it being respected. The Taoiseach is making the point in relation to one of the matters he is bringing for judicial review in a court action that he is obliged not to give the information he gives in this House. His legal advice, which is based on constitutional provisions in Bunreacht na hÉireann, is not that he should be obliged to give this information but that he is obliged not to give it.

These are matters of substance and other matters of substance brought by counsel for the tribunal and others have been adjudicated on by the High Court and Supreme Court. I invite Deputies to read the Supreme Court judgments in which strong views are expressed by eminent members of the Judiciary on certain issues that came before the court. There are fair procedures to be adjudicated on. The right to constitutional and natural justice is an unenumerated constitutional right in case law and before the courts. It is available to every citizen, however humble or eminent.

See this speech in context