Don Lydon (Fianna Fail)

I do not know who could argue with most of the aspirations of this excellent Bill, which represents a comprehensive updating of the legislation regulating medical practitioners, outlines an explicit definition of the role of the Medical Council, provides for increased lay membership of the council, puts new obligations on the council to adhere to the governance arrangements which apply to other statutory bodies, accelerates the relevant investigatory systems, streamlines the process of registration and prohibits unregistered medical practitioners. As the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, said, the Bill aims to enhance patient safety, which is at the heart of the health care reform agenda. It will safeguard the accountability of health care professionals, which is excellent.

I have no problem with the appointment of a lay majority to the Medical Council. When I started to work in the hospitals sector many years ago, doctors were treated like gods. When ward rounds took place, consultants walked in front and a row of people lined up behind them. One could hardly touch consultants, never mind speak to them. As time went by, they gradually mollified their views and became more human, if not exactly humane. As things are different nowadays, it is no harm to have a lay majority on any professional body to keep the profession in place. It is ridiculous to say, as Dr. Catherine Wan did, that the Minister could introduce unlicensed surgeons under this legislation. That does not make sense at all. All kinds of concerns have been expressed about the appointment of lay people to these bodies. It has been suggested that they will do things that will destroy the ability of doctors to perform correctly. That will not happen in the slightest. It did not happen in any other profession. I do not see why it should happen in medicine. If one has nothing to fear, one has nothing about which to worry. If some of this governance had been established in the past perhaps the Neary case would not have occurred.

Section 17(7) refers to a person being ineligible for appointment to the council if the person is a member of the Oireachtas, the European Parliament or a local authority. If Senator Henry is appointed must she resign her seat in the Seanad? This is ludicrous. For example, Dr. Mary Grehan or Dr. Bill O'Connell would have to resign local council seats if appointed to the Medical Council. I have no idea how this would affect them.

The Minister of State has informed us that the Minister for Health and Children will propose to Government the establishment of a committee to examine legislative provision regarding local authority members on boards of certain public bodies in the future. That does not deal with this Bill. Why do we eliminate these people? A councillor recently commented that being a members of a local council is tantamount to being a member of a subversive organisation. Talented people could serve on the Medical Council as well as on the local council. Maria Corr is a talented person, a psychologist with 20 years experience. Could she not serve on the Medical Council as well as on the local council?

One might as well argue that the health boards, which operated successfully for several years, made no sound decisions because they included local authority members. Some of the good decisions made by health boards are better than those made by the HSE.

Might Oireachtas Members or members of local authorities exert undue influence? Is this not one of the reasons they should be members of the Medical Council? This measure is retrograde, regressive and regrettable. I hope the Minister will change her mind on Committee Stage but I doubt she will. I have no objection to the thrust of this worthwhile Bill, particularly the sections that deal with registration and prohibitions on those who are not properly registered.