Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 5 Dec 1995

Vol. 459 No. 3

Written Answers. - Hepatitis C Cases.

Máire Geoghegan-Quinn

Question:

31 Mrs. Geoghegan-Quinn asked the Minister for Health the progress, if any, made in his negotiations with Positive Action and other groups representing those with hepatitis C; his views on whether a statutory tribunal is the way to proceed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18147/95]

Minister for Health (Mr. Noonan

, Limerick East): I met “Positive Action”— the support group for Anti-D recipients and their families — on 1 November, 1995. It was agreed at that meeting that intensive discussions would take place during the month of November between officials of my Department and the executive of “Positive Action” and between the legal advisers to the Government and the legal advisers to “Positive Action”, in an attempt to resolve outstanding issues.

To the conclusion of these discussions, comprehensive documents on a non-statutory compensation scheme and on health care measures to address the many complex and varied needs of those diagnosed positive for hepatitis C were forwarded to the executive committee of the organisation on Friday, 1 December. Similar comprehensive documents were forwarded on 1 December, 1995 to "Transfusion Positive"— the support group for blood transfusion recipients who have been diagnosed positive for hepatitis C. I propose to circulate copies of these documents to all Members of the Oireachtas later this week.

The non-statutory scheme of compensation offers numerous advantages as opposed to court proceedings and without the delays and costs associated with a statutory scheme. The advantages for Tribunal applicants include: speed, informality, flexibility and privacy; negligence need not be proved; the right of court action is completely preserved unless and until an award is accepted by the applicant; proceedings before the Tribunal will be subject to judicial review; the concept of a provisional award, which is not available in Irish law, allows a claimant to return to the Tribunal for future specified unexpected consequences of the hepatitis C infection: this is a particularly important option for claimants given the uncertain nature of the hepatitis C infection and the scheme is entirely optional and imposes no disadvantage to applicants. It is explicitly stated in the provisions of the scheme that it will continue indefinitely.

I anticipate that there will be an opportunity later this week to make a full presentation of the outcome of the negotiations to members of the Social Affairs Committee. I would propose to make a full statement on this matter on that occasion.