Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

It is unfortunate that he has been delegated that duty when there are a number of Ministers of State, as well as the Minister for Health, who could respond on an important matter that has been brought to the attention of the public this week, namely, that non-specialist doctors are being appointed as consultants.

In recent years we have seen a massive recruitment crisis in health care, primarily due to the failure by the current and previous Government to keep our graduates in the country and in training schemes. However, it appears that the solution from the Health Service Executive, HSE, and the Department of Health was to appoint people as consultants when they were not part of specialist training schemes. That has considerable consequences for patient safety and patient care. To be clear, the HSE's own definition of a consultant is defined as a registered medical or dental practitioner who, by reason of his or her training, skill and expertise, is in a designated specialty, is consulted by other registered medical practitioners and has a continuing clinical and professional responsibility to the patients under his or her care.

We know that under the Medical Practitioners Act 2007, consultants must be part of specialist training schemes to be the very definition of a consultant. However, we know, from good authority from people on the ground, that the Government and the HSE have appointed people to positions for which they are not actually qualified and where they are not in the specialised training schemes. That has massive consequences for patient safety.

Were the Minister of State running the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport and had he responsibility for airlines and pilots, would he be happy to have a captain flying a plane who did not have a licence for that position? As I think his answer would be "No", why is it good enough for the Government and the HSE to allow people to be appointed to consultant positions when they are not on specialist training schemes and do not meet the definition the State has upheld? It has considerable consequences for patient safety for those with complex medical conditions. They have presented with an enormous problem in their lives and are told the consultant in whatever hospital is addressing that matter but under the definition of the State, that consultant is not a consultant because he or she is not part of specialist training schemes. It is a form of deception. It is misleading patients but is also undermining the training of other junior doctors within our hospital system because if the lead clinician or consultant is not actually a consultant and is not part of a specialist training scheme leading a particular clinical team, that undermines the training and recruitment process for the other junior doctors who may be part of specialist training schemes.

The fact that the Government has employed people permanently when they are not consultants as defined by the HSE is a massive issue of ethics. It breaches the Medical Practitioners Act 2007 and it breaches the consultant contract. It is fundamental, therefore, that the Minister of State gives an explanation, even though it is not his line Department, as to how this has occurred. Is he happy that clinical safety will be upheld and can he provide certainty to the House that this practice is not systemic because we have it on good authority that this is the case?

Were the Minister of State heading up the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, he would not be happy for pilots to fly planes when they are not licensed to do so. That is what is happening at present in the health service, and it is very unfortunate that neither the Minister for Health nor any Minister of State in that Department is present because this is a massive issue of clinical safety. Clearly, it is not important enough for them to show up and I am disappointed by that.

See this speech in context