Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

Earlier this year, the Committee of Public Accounts, of which I am a member, was presented with a briefing note on the HSE's spending on legal services and its open disclosure policy. We were also told that a contingent liability of €2 billion is needed by the HSE to fund claims into the future. The briefing note goes on to say that international evidence has demonstrated that patients are often forced down the legal route to get answers, acknowledgement and apologies when things go wrong with their care. Here we are, ten years on, and a woman in the worst of circumstances has been dragged through the courts to get answers. Indeed, had Vicky Phelan not been so brave to do what she did, then none of us would be any the wiser. Even if open disclosure is in place and these issues are mediated, what assurances are there that the identified failures will be remedied for others in the future? It takes people going public and not signing confidentiality agreements to force this into the public domain. How many other scandals have fallen under the radar because someone has agreed to a confidentiality clause? At what point do these repeated failings lead to system reform? The State Claims Agency alone has the legal authority to determine the management of claims made against the HSE. On the RTÉ news last night, the State Claims Agency said that in the case of medical negligence, the agency's policy is to admit liability. That is a direct contradiction to the statement of Caoimhe Haughey of C.M. Haughey Solicitors on the same programme, who said that, in her experience, the State Claims Agency robustly defends every case and shows little or no compassion. Her comments are played out week after week when we see the HSE apologise after a settlement is made in the courts for medical negligence.

There is a litany of cases we could point to, including the one to which Deputy Connolly has drawn attention. Last week, we had the "Prime Time" programme relating to child and youth mental health services and the failures there. Do we have to continuously have high profile failures or force people to lay themselves and their personal stories bare in the media or courtroom for our systems to be overhauled? The Taoiseach was Minister for Health when the proposed legislation to make open disclosure mandatory was rejected. He made a decision to establish a patient safety office within his Department rather than the impartial office which leading health experts said was required. Does the Taoiseach accept that, in doing so, he removed any hope of true impartiality within that office and by failing to heed the World Health Organization's advice to implement mandatory open disclosure? His actions in 2014 have directly contributed to the current scandal. At the time, his now Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment, Deputy Denis Naughten, said that in failing to legislate for mandatory open disclosure, all the Taoiseach was doing was maintaining a lawyer's slush fund. He also described the Taoiseach's comments as absolute nonsense. Does the Taoiseach accept that he was right?

See this speech in context