Clare Daly (Dublin North, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister of State is aware that RTE's "Prime Time" programme recently shed light on the Government's handling of the thalidomide scandal in the 1960s. Documents produced show that the Government made a conscious decision not to issue a public warning on the dangers of thalidomide as such a move was regarded as "undesirable". That has serious ramifications for a scandal that has gone on for decades at this stage.

Thalidomide was a drug marketed for morning sickness but problems arose with it which led to the foetus in many instances being malformed and the children being born with serious lifelong physical defects. The German Government and chemical company involved brought forward a compensation package years later. I am aware the programme for Government gave a commitment to reopen discussions regarding this compensation programme. Many of the survivors, of which there are 32, are seeking an enhanced care package with access to adapted housing, cars and other services. They are saying that the spirit of the agreement entered into with their parents in the 1970s should be honoured.

Discussions between them and the Department broke down earlier in the year. The Minister for Health said they had broken down on the basis of legal advice to the Government that the State does not have legal liability for injuries suffered by the survivors of the drug. The recent revelations from documents from the Department cast doubt on the accuracy of the Minister’s statement, however. If the State was well aware of the concerns about the drug in 1959 but failed to take any action until the middle of 1962, then several of these survivors and victims of thalidomide have a legitimate case to argue the State is wholly responsible as it had possession of knowledge with which it refused to deal.

At the time, the drug company involved had withdrawn the drug from the market. Some of the quotes from the Irish State authorities at the time in the recently disclosed documents seem quite callous. Basically, they said because the drug companies had withdrawn it, they need not worry about it. This was inappropriate. Another document reveals, “It was felt that any supplies which had already reached domestic stocks presented a special problem that could only be tackled by public announcements. This step was regarded as undesirable. It was thought that even if it were taken, it would prove largely ineffective”. Sadly, we will never know because the public announcement was not made. Instead, we had a confidential circular issued with an inadequate recall of the drug.

These documents alter the balance of forces in the Government’s position on the negotiations with the thalidomide survivors. The points made by the Minister in July that the State is not responsible have been shown up to be not the case. I hope the Government will take this into account in addressing the outstanding concerns of the victims of thalidomide for adequate compensation to meet their needs.

Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Before I give the official answer, it often strikes me that it can come across as clinical and simply giving the facts. Everyone in this State knows of a person with a difficulty from thalidomide. I accept sympathy does not pay the bills either. It is also not a case of the Government refusing to open to negotiations.

I am pleased to take this opportunity to outline the current position on the Irish survivors of thalidomide. When one thinks there are only 32 survivors, who would not want to deal with this problem?

Lest there be any misunderstanding, this Government did not suppress any information. The document referred to in recent media reports is a document dating from 1974 prepared by officials in the Department of Health for the then Minister. This document, among other matters, outlines a position adopted in 1962. The distributors of thalidomide in Ireland suspended distribution of the drug in December 1961 and then withdrew stocks of the drug in January 1962. It was decided at that time not to issue a public statement. The document, however, outlines that it was decided in June 1962 that the most effective step to take to deal with the issue was to circulate all chief medical officers to ensure all doctors, chemists and hospitals in their area would secure the return of any unused stocks. As Deputy Clare Daly said, how were we supposed to get to women who had it in the medicine cabinet already?

It is important to bear in mind that action taken in 1962 should not be judged or reviewed applying the rules or regimes applicable today. I am sure we would not do today what was done then. It would seem the position in Ireland did not materially differ from the position in other European countries at the time. Few countries then had systematic controls for licensing drugs and it was in the light of the thalidomide experience that most countries developed such arrangements. This was reiterated by one of the thalidomide survivors on the recent "Prime Time" programme on the matter. The document states: "It is of interest to note that the attitude of the British authorities was no different.” This is not an excuse.

This document was released by the Department of Health in 2010 to solicitors representing Irish survivors of thalidomide, along with all other records available to the Department relating to the period in question. The Government’s focus is to address issues which remain and the programme for Government includes a commitment to reopen discussions with Irish survivors of thalidomide. Given the challenges that persist for each individual, the Government's aim is to address the health and personal social care needs of thalidomide survivors living in Ireland.

There are 31 Irish survivors of thalidomide receiving tax free payments from the Department of Health. A German foundation also pays Irish survivors of thalidomide, payments which are also tax free. Since 1 August 2013, the German foundation has substantially increased its monthly payments to Irish thalidomide survivors. In addition, 15 survivors who accepted it at the time received a once-off payment from the Department of Health in July 2013 of €62,500.

Up to 22 of the Irish survivors of thalidomide have initiated personal injury claims against the State. A mediation conference is proposed for these claims. It is hoped this can proceed early in the new year. Both I and the Minister for Health are determined to ensure equality of treatment for all Irish survivors of thalidomide. The Government will continue to work to find a way forward to progress matters for Irish survivors through discussions. All Members are anxious this matter is resolved as quickly as possible.

Clare Daly (Dublin North, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

While dealing with 32 survivors might seem a small figure, this process has trundled on for decades, over the lifetimes of these victims. The State did not consciously suppress the 1974 documentation but what is revealed is the extent of knowledge which was not shared. Had it been shared, lives could have been changed. In that sense, the State responded inappropriately and is culpable to a degree. The programme for Government accepts State culpability and agrees on the provision of an adequate compensation and care package. The necessity for a proper package is the most persistent demand from the survivors. When we raised it previously, the Minister for Health has said as they get a medical card, they can apply for housing adaptation grants and so forth. They have applied for many of these services but not received them. They want these services to be ring-fenced and guaranteed as a right to people to whom an injustice has been done. We now have the proof that there was knowledge about the dangers of the drug, a better response could have saved many. Hopefully, we have learned from this. The State’s response in 1962, through a confidential memorandum to the medical profession, was wholly inadequate. At least this would not happen now. Transparency and knowledge is a good development that should be encouraged rather than authorities trying to keep a lid on matters.

Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are all singing from the same hymn sheet in that knowledge and transparency is what will protect us all. We already have care packages in place for hepatitis C sufferers so we know what is needed in this case. It is a matter of agreement but there is some disagreement between some of the group themselves. There is a solution and we just have to keep trying to find it.