Deirdre Clune (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)

I hope the Minister will have a change of heart about this motion and not force the Deputies on the Government side to vote against it. I have listened to speakers on the Government side almost justifying not introducing this vaccination programme. They say it will only affect 70%. We have heard the New England Journal of Medicine quoted, contradicted and riders attached to the quotes. The fact is that the Health Information and Quality Authority, HIQA, was asked to produce a report on the introduction of the vaccination programme. It recommended in positive terms that the programme be introduced for 12 year old girls and that there be a catch-up programme for girls aged 13 to 15 years old.

The Minister agreed with the HIQA report. It was clear and positive. It outlined the figures for the effect the programme would have in reducing the number of cervical cancer cases and the number of deaths from such cases. More than three months ago the Minister positively endorsed the report and announced the introduction of a vaccination programme for 12 year old girls. However, within a short time that decision has been reversed on economic grounds. Having listened to the contributions in the House and in the media on the debate which justify the decision one would think we were discussing a by-pass or other road infrastructure project, whereas we are discussing people's lives. I do not wish to be emotive but practical and I appeal to the Minister to reverse the decision on economic grounds. There is evidence this programme could save the lives of young girls and women in later years. The programme would also save the State money in the long term and withdrawing it is a false economy.

The bottom line is that parents who can afford to provide the vaccine for their daughters will do so, especially following the publicity generated in the past week. People are well educated and are aware of the value of this vaccination programme. Any parent who can afford to pay for vaccination will not ignore the evidence or the figures and will ensure their daughter is vaccinated. However, this only applies to parents who have the means to do so. It is fine for those who have a choice, but there are adverse consequences for those who do not have a choice and cannot afford it. The programme is estimated to cost €600 for the three courses comprising the vaccination. Those who cannot afford the treatment for their daughters are being discriminated against by this unjust and unfair reversal of a decision about which the Minister was so enthusiastic only three months ago. Yet, today we hear it cannot proceed for economic reasons.

Will the Minister reconsider this unjust decision which prevents universal vaccination? Such a move would prevent those sitting on the Government side of the House from going through the torture of having to support a motion that, in their hearts, they cannot support. I appeal to the Minister to reconsider this decision.

The Minister stated only two EU countries, namely, Finland and Ireland, do not have this vaccination programme in place. However, I heard on the radio this evening that Finland has a gold card and a cancer prevention programme and that the mortality rates are considerably lower there than in Ireland. Therefore, it does not make sense to compare the two countries. It is clear the cost of the programme is a small amount of money in the overall scheme of things. There have been numerous suggestions put to the Minister on how she could find savings elsewhere in the €16 billion health budget. I appeal to her to reconsider the decision and to re-examine the health allocation to find the necessary means to introduce this programme.

See this speech in context