Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy O'Connell for bringing forward this Bill. We are happy to support it. I want to say a word about some of the people who have criticised the Bill. Perhaps they were trying to muddy the waters a little. For us, the intent of the Bill is clear and we support absolutely the intent. I am pleased Deputy O'Connell has said she is willing and open to working with people and Opposition Deputies. That is a good thing. I agree with Deputy Donnelly that some form of committee scrutiny might be helpful, but that would simply be to strengthen it.

We have absolutely no problem with the intent of the Bill. Section 2(1) states:

No person shall take any part in the publication of any advertisement containing an offer to treat any person or provide any remedy for cancer, or any advice in connection with the treatment of cancer, or which suggests that a medical consultation, diagnosis, treatment or surgical operation is unnecessary for the treatment of cancer.

It is difficult to argue against that. The idea is to prohibit someone from deliberately targeting a vulnerable person at a time in life when that person would be least able to avoid such targeting and when the person would in fact be absolutely desperate. It is really sad that people would do such a thing. It is shocking and horrible but the fact is that some people do this. I suppose bad things happen and maybe that is why we were sent in here to deal with them.

The Bill does not attack or ban complementary therapies such as acupuncture, massage or mindfulness when carried out alongside medical treatment as recommended by a doctor. It is important that we put that on the record. I have been contacted - I imagine others have as well - by people expressing disbelief that we were about to outlaw massage therapy and so on. Clearly, we are not going to do that and we are not trying to outlaw acupuncture either. It is important that we do not get confused about that. Many patients find those therapies helpful and useful and find that they have a real and serious benefit.

The intention behind the Bill is to focus on the publication of advertisements and to prohibit people from offering to treat or remedy cancer while suggesting that medical consultation or proper diagnosis or medical treatment are unnecessary. That is worrying but we need to put ourselves in the shoes of the person who would be targeted. Such a person may be highly vulnerable and at a bad time in life and may believe the medical profession has been a let-down because there is no sign of getting better. It is worrying that such people would be targeted but I guess the fact is that we know they are.

I echo what has been said before about the evidence. We need to interrogate how serious a problem this is. Perhaps we need to look beyond cancer as a disease and look to other areas. I imagine someone deceitful enough to target a person with cancer would probably not decide to limit targeting to those with cancer and opt not to go after someone with a different condition. If such people are around, it is probably of some benefit to look beyond a single disease. I have talked to people in advocacy groups. They say they have seen an upsurge in such activity. Perhaps that makes the Bill necessary. I imagine Deputy O'Connell would say we have to start somewhere and that this is as good a place as any.

We have all heard the nonsense - especially those of us interested in the area of health - that there is a treatment for cancer and that doctors and big pharma are somehow attempting to cover it up or keep it out of the public domain. The story goes that the cure is out there and if we could simply get past the powers that be, we could get to it. Pseudoscience is really harmful. We saw that with the initial decrease in the level of vaccinations. Thankfully, there has been some resurgence. In any event, that is concerning. It points to an area where vulnerable people have been targeted, including people who get information from the Internet and social media but not from their doctors. There are serious consequences for people's health and lives when unsubstantiated claims are made with no medical or scientific basis. That is the perspective behind the Bill. It is a public health matter that we need to take seriously.

I welcome the fact that Deputy O'Connell has indicated openness to discussions because I believe that if we work together we can ensure we strengthen the Bill where it is needed. We know a good deal about fake news and social media. It has been referenced previously. Twenty years ago, people would have been unable to do this to the extent that it is being done now. That is why we need to ensure that we tackle this. The spread is almost uncontrollable. It is not a case of information going by word of mouth or by an advertisement in the local supermarket. It goes from home to home quickly and it makes its way around the world very fast.

Before I came in, I received correspondence from the Irish Cancer Society. Very worryingly, it points out that patients are being urged to stop their medical treatment, to use alternative treatments that have caused harmful side-effects and, in some cases, even death. The Cancer Society has called for an end to the direct targeting of those living with cancer by people who are wholly unqualified to advise them. It is regrettable that it has had to call for that. For the avoidance of doubt, we are not attacking the use of complementary therapies such as acupuncture, massage etc. We are ensuring that those who are targeting people without a medical basis to do so can be prevented. It is important to say that those complementary therapies will not be impacted by this legislation because there is a significant number of people who believe that they somehow will be. It would be good to assuage those concerns.

There have been significant advances in surgical treatment, radiotherapy and chemotherapy in multimodality treatment. Much of this has been driven by the medical profession. I have seen it. I have spoken to surgeons, consultants, doctors and nurses and seen the real difference that those individual health professionals have made. We also have to be sure that cancer treatment in the health service as a whole is properly resourced. Furthermore, we need to make sure that the hard work of our dedicated medical professionals is matched with resources and funding. These things make a real and tangible difference, they improve outcomes and they save lives.

I thank Deputy O'Connell for introducing the Bill. I assure her of our support for its intent and our continued co-operation to ensure, whether on Committee Stage or informally, that we can strengthen this legislation and make sure that it is fit for purpose and provides the help and the sanction that might be needed.

See this speech in context