Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 6:

In page 15, line 31, to delete “or a local authority”.

Amendments Nos. 6 to 8, inclusive, were tied to amendment No. 5, in the name of Deputy Louise O'Reilly, which has been ruled out of order in a bizarre manner, although we will not go into it. The intention of the four amendments was to try to ensure representatives of workers, patients and Dublin City Council would be on the board in some form or other. We have seen this happen during the years. For example, there are Dublin City Council representatives on the board of Our Lady's Children's Hospital in Crumlin, something which has served the hospital and patients well. As I was never a member of Dublin City Council, I do not say that because I was a part of it.

Perhaps it might have been better to stick with the old health boards and tweak them a little, as there might not be as much chaos as there is. Sometimes the more local board members are, the better their understanding. It can also bring some expertise. A representative of workers could be a representative of the ICTU, for example. In many hospitals we find that by the time an issue enters the public domain, it is usually getting very close to a strike. However, if issues were raised early enough at board level by workers' representatives, problems might not arise because those who would take wrong decisions would not take them because they would be afraid the issues would be raised at board level. That is why workers' representatives should be on a board. They could answer about what was going on with staff or how changes in management decisions were affecting the running of the hospital. The most practical solutions in a hospital often come from staff, in particular front-line staff and from the ground up. It is about trying to get them to board level in order that the staff would be listened to and have their concerns acted on as early as possible, rather than having them fester.

The idea of a patient advocate is a no-brainer, but as I said, that amendment was ruled out of order and the other three are tied to it. I will still pursue them because there is logic behind them, but they are consequential on amendment No. 5.

See this speech in context