Mary Henry (Independent)

I will conclude quickly. We wanted to get information because those figures could be included under deaths in hospital. I could not get them from the Department of Health and Children, so I put in a request under the Freedom of Information Act and it was refused on a technicality. It said I could try the Central Statistics Office but while the CSO would know the place of death of the person, it would not know the place of birth. That was not much help.

I will explain the reason this is so important. An area in the Bill now before the House is heavily criticised in this report, which I have to speed read. Under the section in the report on section 22(1)(a) and (b), if one asks a question about one body and the answer could impinge on the activities of another body, it will not give an answer. It is even worse than the position previously when the Department of Health and Children said it would not give me information of such importance. What is more important, apart from the maternal mortality figures, than the perinatal mortality figures? They are the essence of the health service, yet I could not get those figures. We now have no hope of getting them because it will say it impinges on the workings of some hospital or something like that.

This report states that the sections are to be amended by providing a revised wording for paragraphs (a) and (b) to the effect that the principal Act will extend the protection available to any public body, not just the public body that is the subject of the request. That is the reason we should not go on—