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

5. To ask the Minister for Defence if he has followed the recent discussions in the Australian Parliament and in the British Parliament in relation to the impact of lariam on the mental health of defence forces personnel; the action he proposes to take as a result; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34755/15]

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

This question follows on the earlier question put by Deputy Crowe on Lariam. It is not a question of making a choice between malaria and a debilitating life, and death through suicide. It is about listening to the best medical information that is available. We are joined in the Visitors' Gallery by Mark O'Sullivan, who served 18 years in the Defence Forces and is facing medical discharge in approximately three weeks. He has served three times overseas and experienced very bad reactions as a result of Lariam in Liberia.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I totally agree with the Deputy on this. This is about getting the best medical advice, and I also agree with Deputy Crowe. The reason I am a little defensive is that it is not an easy decision. There are some problems with Lariam for some people. I have used Lariam and did not have any side effects, but I am lucky, as other people have experienced side effects. It is about balancing the health concerns of our troops who go abroad to conflict zones where there is malaria. Different strains of malaria require different drugs. Not all of our troops who go abroad are treated with Lariam.

I have tried to be consistent on this and have tried to ensure that the decisions made are informed by the best medical advice in Ireland and abroad, which is why I have asked the working group on Lariam to look at this again and come back to me with a report before the end of the year. I have asked them whether there is updated information on better alternatives to Lariam that we can use, with a lower chance of negative side effects, and whether we can screen our troops more effectively before they depart to reduce the risk from the use of Lariam. All of these things are being considered. I would have no problem with saying we would not use Lariam any more if I felt that was the right decision to take for medical reasons. However, what I do not want to do is just say that and expose Irish Defence Forces personnel to a risk of contracting malaria, which is a killer disease.

I have made it clear within the Department that I want the working group to produce another report and to look again at what is being said abroad and at the medical advice available here at home. We will do all of that. Next year we will be forced into making a decision because Lariam may not be available here. That is fine. However, I cannot and will not send troops into areas abroad if I am not satisfied that we have reduced their risk of exposure to malaria to the maximum possible extent using the best available drugs. There is no perfect drug for malaria and if anybody says there is, I would like to hear about it. This is about minimising risk and taking decisions on the basis of good medical advice. That is the only consideration I have when looking at the issue of Lariam.

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

There are two problems with the Minister's response. One is that it seems to be taking an incredibly long time for the Department to consider this matter, and there is no indication of any urgency at all. Nobody said that Lariam was the only drug, but the attitude of the Irish Defence Forces has primarily been of that view. Back in 1992, the World Health Organisation warned against the use of Lariam, specifically in regard to troops in Cambodia at that time. We are now in 2015, and the more we delay, the more people like Mark are subjected to Lariam and its potential side effects in that scenario.

The select Defence Committee in Britain is examining this issue in a proactive way, and the Australian Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade has launched an inquiry into the use of Lariam. It is not good enough to say we have a working group and hopefully it will provide findings soon or that we will not be able to have this drug next year anyway. We need action to be taken now. Would the Minister be available to meet Mark to discuss this after these questions?

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am not saying "ah sure" anything. I am saying that the working group looked at the issue and came back with the recommendation that on balance we should continue using Lariam. I have asked the group to look at the issue again. That work only started in September and the group will report before the end of the year. This is not a blasé attitude, as the Deputy is suggesting, but quite the opposite.

I will continue to ask for ongoing assessments of whether this is the right policy. People are asking questions, including people like Seán, who I am delighted to see here today and who is very welcome. Obviously, these people are very concerned about the issue. As Minister for Defence, whose primary focus and responsibility is to ensure our troops are safe where they are trying to help protect the safety of others, I try to ensure that they are given the best possible medical treatment we can give them both at home and abroad. As soon as I get an updated report from the working group - there are experts on that group - we will act on that. I cannot be more up-front than that.

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

I do not know what is the nature of the assessment such that it will take three months to get it. Concerns have been raised about the ability or professional status of those who have reviewed this. Why does the Minister not consider the views of the troops involved and some of the people who have had direct experience and a negative reaction? Why can we not have open hearings similar to those that have been held in Australia on this issue, at which the testimony of those badly affected can be heard? People like Mark have had to spend a fortune on private medical opinion, which gives a very different interpretation of Lariam than the one the Minister has recounted, based on the advice given by his people. The delay on this is not good enough. We have been discussing this for years and, tragically, more people who have been given Lariam will probably have had negative reactions during that time.

Lariam is the subject of inquiries in Britain, Australia and other areas, but I see no urgency on the part of the Minister on this issue. The facts have been presented to his Department but we need more urgency.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Regardless of what I say here, the Deputy will not be satisfied. An ongoing review is taking place which takes into account the experience of Irish troops. That is the point of it. It aims to achieve results that ensure our troops do not get malaria and to assess what side effects there have been for our troops and for people like Mark. I will act, but on the basis of medical advice, as opposed to what Deputy Daly is demanding.

There are differing views in the context of the private sector, as the Deputy termed it. When I used Lariam, it was given to me by my local GP. It was not a public policy issue. There are varying views and no easy solutions to protect our troops from malaria. I believe that putting together an expert group that is not influenced by the politics of this issue but that wants to make a decision based on the medical facts available at home and abroad is the right way to go, and that is what we are going to do.