Brian Cowen
Question:8 Mr. Cowen asked the Minister for Health if he will lay before Dáil Éireann any correspondence on the McCole case between the Government, the Blood Transfusion Service Board and the National Drugs Advisory Board. [9047/97]
Priority Questions. - McCole Case Documentation.
(Limerick East): There is no correspondence between the Government and the Blood Transfusion Service Board or the National Drugs Advisory Board on the McCole case.
On any correspondence between any official of his Department, other Government Departments, the Attorney General's office or the Chief State Solicitor's office and any State agency, will the Minister confirm it is open to him as Minister, to waive any claim of privilege to allow Members of the House access to such documentation?
(Limerick East): While many things are possible in theory, in practice we must remember there are other cases before the courts. This takes us back to an issue on which I have answered questions time out of number here. There were three organisations, if that is the correct description, being sued by plaintiffs, including the late Mrs. McCole, one, the State, another the National Drugs Advisory Board and the third the Blood Transfusion Service Board. Each of those entities had separate boards, separate legal teams, solicitors and barristers and, in the case of the BTSB and the National Drugs Advisory Board, separate insurance. They conducted their defence cases separately. The State conducted the defence case on behalf of the State but did not have any policy directive, control or management of the defence cases being pursued by the Blood Transfusion Service Board or the National Drugs Advisory Board.
On the State legal case, leaving aside for a moment the BTSB and the NDAB, will the Minister confirm it is open to him as Minister for Health to waive any claim of privilege which he may or may not know is being claimed by the Chief State Solicitor, by letter to a committee of this House this afternoon?
(Limerick East): It would be very imprudent for a Minister to act at any point——
That is not the question.
(Limerick East):——contrary to legal advice or common sense. With many cases listed for High Court hearings — one is laid down for 1 July — to do as the Deputy suggests would be entirely inappropriate.
The Minister is refusing to answer a simple question. He either knows his powers as Minister or he does not. I am asking him a general question which he can answer openly, honestly and transparently. Is it open to the Minister to waive privilege if he so wishes in regard to any matter of public concern which would release agents of the State to give evidence to a parliamentary committee? If he wants to distance this case from all the other cases, is it open to him to waive privilege in regard to specific matters relating to the McCole case, which has nothing to do with the conduct of the courts but is simply a question of finding out who did what and when? Will the Minister confirm he has power to waive that privilege?
(Limerick East): As I said, in academic legal discussions——
This is not academic, it is practical.
(Limerick East):——many things are possible, but in practice where other cases are listed before the High Court, it is not a practical proposition.
The Minister is refusing to answer the question. It is within his power to waive privilege, and well he knows that. He will be before the committee soon and will be asked to confirm that.