It did not at that time meet the standards. That is a fact and a matter of public record. I regret that I and many thousands of people in the north west were vilified by health professionals and, in my view, people who acted in concert to subvert the course of a process that should have been objective, but was completely subjective. These are all matters that are borne out in documentation finally extracted under duress from the Health Information and Quality Authority.
One HIQA document that came to me was a minute of a meeting which involved the management of the hospital in Galway; its surgeons; Tony O'Brien, the revered head of the national cancer control programme; and John Billings, the quality director of the Health Information and Quality Authority. The top of the document states: "Draft confidential, not for circulation". It does not surprise me. I must quote from it. When members of the medical team in Galway indicated they were nervous about the review it states:
HIQA will construct something that will allow the reviewers to dip into details on certain aspects, but will not aim to catch the centres out. [That is damning in the extreme.] Surgeon is concerned that HIQA may fail on a technicality.
At this stage JB — John Billings, no doubt, the director of quality in our so-called independent Health Information and Quality Authority — said: "No. That will not be the case. We will not do that." These are all documents that we have now managed to get. It took 14 months. In response to my request for all relevant documentation to do with the preparation of this report and the minutes of any relevant meeting, on 18 June 2009 the Health Service Executive had the gall to write to me stating: "No such meetings have taken place between Galway University Hospital and HIQA".
So what have we got here? It is most concerning. We need to assess the implications of the effective organised concealment of information of systemic importance to what HIQA is supposed to be doing in informing the public when they are making informed choices in seeking health care. However, it was the organised concealment of this information that prevented that. In assessing this matter, the similarity with some of the causes of our financial meltdown is unbelievable. We have seen the catastrophe that has been caused in our economy by the unhealthy proximity and familiarity of service providers, the regulatory authorities and, of course, the overall Central Bank and the financial sector, about which I have spoken on many occasions as finance spokesman for the Government. Without doubt, the documents I have confirm that the health service providers — in this instance UCHG, but perhaps others — the independent quality authority and the HSE are operating in an environment that is over-familiar, highly subjective and — if we are to learn from the early lessons from our economic woes — one that could compromise far more than people's financial well being. Clearly that confirms the need to assess governance standards in the HSE, which are clearly in the gutter, and to evaluate the independence of HIQA and the subjective nature of its work, clearly proven by these documents.
I also seek reform of the Health Act 2004 to give some level of public accountability to our health service. I need not remind the Minister of State that €15 billion of the people's money, representing more than 50% of the tax take, is voted directly from the Minister for Finance to one individual, the chief executive officer of the Health Service Executive. That is a disgrace. The people will not put up with such a lack of accountability. I make an analogy. If a person was to spend €100,000 on renovating a house, would he or she go to the local chippy or labourer and hand him or her the entire sum before doing the work? It would not happen; there must be accountability and a project must be managed.
We need as a matter of urgency reform of the Health Act 2004 to bring the budget back under Government control to ensure some level of accountability. Regardless of what is stated on the HSE and HIQA websites, I can indicate the obstructive nature of these bodies, which can be confirmed by the Information Commissioner, Ms Emily O'Reilly. It took me some 14 months to get the information I needed on behalf of the public to assess the policy and performance of an organisation in which there is no public representative influence or involvement. It acts as it sees fit without recourse to the Government or the people. This must change.
They have savaged medical services in the context of cancer treatment services throughout the north west. I have proved that, and it took me 14 months to do so. I remember being vilified by many Members for being critical. However, as the Leader of the House, Senator Cassidy, often says, there is no wrong time to do the right thing. I appeal in earnest, therefore, to the Minister of State on the issue.
I fully appreciate there will be a set-piece reply in which it will be indicated HIQA and the HSE are doing great work on our behalf. I do not want to undermine the individuals who work in both organisations and are doing exceptionally good work. What is wrong — it is fascism in the extreme — is the level of independence of these organisations which act without recourse to the public. This cannot continue, as €15 billion of the people's money is given to them, without a single public representative being able to query them.
This is a minute aspect of the health service, but it took me 14 months to get the proof I needed. I thank the Acting Chairman and the Minister of State for giving of their time and apologise if people believe I am overly passionate on the issue, but do not confuse passion with a lack of determination or conviction. I know I am and have been right on this issue and now I have proof.
