Dáil debates

Tuesday, 1 May 2018

National Cervical Screening Programme: Statements

 

8:25 pm

Photo of Catherine ConnollyCatherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Not too long ago I praised the Minister for Health, Deputy Harris, for his speech on the eighth amendment. I warned the Minister that night that I would not be praising him permanently and I certainly do not praise him tonight. The Minister's speech tonight is more of a spin than an elucidation of what has happened. Reference was made to Brigid McCole who died in October 1996, just over 21 years ago. There has been time to reason and learn from that. At that time the Office of the Chief State Solicitor, acting for then Minister for Health, Deputy Michael Noonan, warned Positive Action that unless it went quietly to the compensation tribunal it would face "uncertainties, delays, stresses, confrontation and costs," and so on. The State pursued Brigid McCole almost right up to the day of her death. It said she had tried to sue under a pseudonym in order to keep her privacy. The State also fought that. I do not have to time to go into the details but we could see the full power of the State coming down on the body of a woman, Brigid McCole, and her family. Here we are 22 years later with the same type of spin.

The Brigid McCole case was absolute bullying but what is coming across now is more of a patronising attitude that "we know best". As a woman, I do not want reassurance. I do not believe that the women of Ireland want reassurance. They would like full information so they can make up their minds on what screening they will access. With regard to this specific issue, the women who are affected need full information. The Minister told the House tonight that information is "emerging" as we speak.

The Minister has given Members a copy of a note in regard to the briefing memo. The Minister's speech has a mistake in it. On page 2 of the speech, the Minister refers to the note which said that the claim against the HSE was likely to fail or be "dropped in the absence of any bad faith". That is not accurate. The note had referred to exemplary damages and the advice from the State Claims Agency that the exemplary damages might not succeed because of lack of faith, not that the case would be dropped. The note also mentions that there was no chance of the case settling because - I believe very bravely - the woman in question would not accept a confidentiality clause. The lab had said that it absolutely had to have a confidentiality clause. Deputy Alan Kelly has already referred to the extraordinary aspect that the National Screening Service and Mr. Jerome Coffey, the head of the National Cancer Control Programme had advised the Department in writing that this was not a "patient safety incident". Perhaps the Minister will explain how anybody could possibly say this was not a patient safety incident.

There is so little time. I do not believe a HIQA investigation is the answer. There are so many questions and to say that HIQA is the answer is certainly, at the very least, premature. We need to establish the full facts and reports on how many women have not been contacted. It is not good enough for the Minister to come to the House tonight to tell us that facts are "emerging".

I received an email from a person who pointed out that a smear test in 2012 had a result that was interpreted wrongly, or a wrong result given. This happened on two different occasions and radical surgery ensued in August 2015. I understand that this person wrote to the head of the screening programme, but no reply was received.

How many letters have been sent by women throughout the State that have not been replied to? What other legal proceedings have been instituted, settled or are still pending? How many cases have been settled with confidentiality clauses because the women had to cave in given their circumstances? At the very least, all this information should be before the House tonight.

It is extremely worrying to me as a woman when I have heard language being used on the radio over the last week or two, which seeks to reassure us. Reassurance cannot, and should not, be given. That is not our role at this point nor is it the Government's. It is the Government's role to give full information and to set up a proper, independent inquiry that, with full information, will give some trust back to the women who have been affected and to the women of Ireland. I do not want any platitudes nor do the women who are writing to me.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.