Brian Hayes (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 7: To ask the Minister for Health and Children if parents that paid hundreds of euro to vaccinate their daughters against cervical cancer will be refunded; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6907/10]

Mary Harney (Dublin Mid West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have always accepted the consensus view of the relevant expert bodies that the introduction of a universal high uptake vaccination programme in young girls, in conjunction with population based cervical screening, could significantly reduce overall cervical cancer incidence. The issue was not, therefore, whether the case for a cervical cancer vaccination programme was accepted by myself and the Government – because it always was – but the priority to be accorded to such a programme within the resources available for public health services and for the cancer programme in particular.

Recently I requested the HSE to initiate a tendering process for the procurement of an HPV vaccine with a view to commencing a HPV vaccination programme for all girls in first year in secondary school and until this process was completed I was not in a position to say if or when I would introduce this programme. This tendering process for the vaccine is now complete. We can now purchase the vaccine at a price much lower than we expected to pay in 2008 and at a price much closer to what is being paid in other countries. In these circumstances, the programme can now be delivered from the extra resources committed in this year's budget to the overall cancer programme.

The HSE is committed to starting this campaign during the current school year. This will involve the free vaccination of up to 30,000 girls mainly in school settings. Details of the full programme will be announced by the HSE in the near future and will involve the vaccine being offered each year to all girls in first year in secondary school. Unfortunately it will not be possible to refund the costs of vaccinations administered privately.

James Reilly (Dublin North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have a number of points for the Minister and then a question.

I wholeheartedly welcome the Minister's decision to go ahead with the vaccination programme. She knows my views and everyone else is aware of them, too, in terms of the importance of this. It was never a case of either or, but rather of both together. I am glad she now confirms that she always accepted that because we had a debate here and the eminent Deputy O'Hanlon cast aspersions on articles in the New England Journal of Medicine as regards safety issues around that vaccine. In fact there are not.

Why can the Minister not find it in her heart to recompense those who were responsible, proactive and decided to vaccinate their children against this risk? A gesture towards reimbursing the cost of the vaccine is the minimum that could be done, I suggest. The cost would be incurred anyway and it would be a gesture to the parents of those children who went through financial hardship and paid up to €600.

While I am on my feet the Minister might consider settling with Sanofi Pasteur for the remaining debt that I and my group owe them for the children we vaccinated.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Personal pleading is not allowed.

Mary Harney (Dublin Mid West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am sure it would be highly inappropriate for Deputy Reilly to use question time to advance any personal interests.

James Reilly (Dublin North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It was not a personal interest, it was a public interest.

Mary Harney (Dublin Mid West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It was never intended to do a catch-up and one must begin a new programme somewhere. That has been the case in most countries, especially those that have had a country-wide programme. I accept that is not the case everywhere but it has been the case in most places. One must begin somewhere. At the time we accepted the HIQA report and made a decision to proceed with the vaccine we had hoped to start the programme one year earlier and to do a catch up. However, since we gave a commitment to a particular group of girls they will now be vaccinated. They are in first year now and would have been in sixth class at the time. Originally, we intended to do this in primary school because we have a track record of immunisation programmes in primary schools. Now it will be done in secondary school but it will catch the same group of girls that would have received it in sixth class last year.

Given the resource constraints, which are considerable as I remarked earlier, I am not in a position to repay the high cost of €600 to the individuals that availed of it. I acknowledge the cost was high relative to the price for which we can now procure the vaccine.

Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I also welcome the fact the programme is being introduced. However, I refer to the people who paid for it themselves. In fairness to them, they were originally informed the programme would be put in place and they were then informed it would be delayed. By that time there was a good deal of media attention on the issue and a belief among the parents concerned that it was very important for their daughters to get this vaccine. They were not to know that the Minister would introduce the programme in the first year of secondary school instead of sixth class in primary school. There is a case for people to be recompensed. I am unsure how the Minister might do so but there is a case to be made. I remember distinctly a Traveller lady visited my clinic and informed me she would try to save up the money to have her daughter vaccinated because she had heard it was important to do so.

When we debated the matter here at the time it was announced the programme would not go ahead, we stated in the Chamber it could be done a good deal cheaper than the original HIQA costing presented to the Minister. I met representatives of at least one of the companies that makes the vaccine. They informed me they could do it a good deal cheaper. Did the Minister approach the companies before she originally announced the decision to cancel the programme?

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

My question is not unrelated. First, to give the Minister a head-spin altogether, there is now a trio of health spokespersons from the Opposition saying "Well done." I agree fully with the decision to go ahead with this vaccine and I am pleased to say the Minister has done the right thing in this case.

I refer to the issue of cost. The Minister's original estimate or the estimate provided to her was, if I recall correctly, some €16 million for the HPV, human papilloma virus, vaccine. Now, a figure of €3 million has been indicated for this roll-out. Will the Minister explain this? An initial read would suggest the explanation of such a difference is that there must have been an inordinate profit involved for the pharmaceutical companies.

I refer to public information. What proactive information programme does the Minister intend to roll out to inform teachers, principals, parents and pupils such that there is an understanding of the importance of the vaccine and its uptake?

Mary Harney (Dublin Mid West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Deputies for their generous comments. We will be proactive in the first instance with parents because we are vaccinating minors and parents must give their permission. This programme is currently being worked on by the HSE and will be announced shortly. We wish to start the vaccination programme before the summer because individuals must receive three doses during this calendar year and we must have a record of such individuals and so on.

Regarding cost, soundings were take from the companies even after the decision to postpone the programme from 2008 and 2009 to 2010. I met representatives from both companies. The figures being advanced at the time were substantially different from what subsequently transpired. To be fair to the two companies, they responded to my request and to the current financial circumstances in which the country finds itself. We are all aware from colleagues in other countries that large markets get pharmaceutical products, including vaccines, at substantially reduced prices, unlike small markets such as Ireland. Since we were aware of information from our nearest neighbours in respect of the cost, we were able to request that the companies respond in a similar fashion in Ireland to the way in which they responded in the UK and they did so. The cost reduction from €16 million to €3 million is not only savings in vaccine. Clearly, the bulk of the savings are from the vaccine but there are also savings on the administration of the vaccine by the HSE, the cost of which has been considerably reduced as well.

It is unfortunate and I am loath to say it because it sounds churlish, but we are not able to repay individuals who may have paid €600. We are simply not in a position to do so.

James Reilly (Dublin North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Minister reimburse the people the cost of the vaccine that she would otherwise pay, which is only €100 per head? It would be a gesture.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister can reflect upon that.