Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 13 Mar 1996

Vol. 463 No. 1

Written Answers. - Meetings with Hepatitis C Victims.

Máire Geoghegan-Quinn

Ceist:

18 Mrs. Geoghegan-Quinn asked the Minister for Health the action, if any, he has taken following his commitment on Second Stage of the Health Amendment Bill to meet with the groups representing victims of the hepatitis C scandal and resolve remaining difficulties; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5787/96]

Minister for Health (Mr. Noonan,

Limerick East): On Second Stage of the Health (Amendment) Bill, 1995, I said that if I can meet the points now being raised by Positive Action, I would not be reluctant to do so.

I wrote to Positive Action on 7 March last in connection with a number of issues which it raised in relation to the working procedures of the Compensation Tribunal, namely a right to give oral evidence by claimant, a right to give oral evidence by a medical practitioner, provision of satisfactory provisional awards and confidentiality in relation to form of authority included in the tribunal application form.

I informed Positive Action that the tribunal recently wrote to solicitors who had made contact with it advising them that all claimants shall be entitled to give oral evidence. In relation to oral medical evidence, the tribunal has advised that there is no prohibition against calling oral evidence regarding the content of medical reports unless the claimant has been notified by it that oral evidence will not be required. If the tribunal has notified the claimant that oral evidence is not required, the claimant may still advance reasons why such evidence should be heard orally and any reasons so advanced will be carefully and fairly considered by it.

I informed Positive Action that the tribunal has advised solicitors regarding provisional awards, as follows:

There cannot be a general unqualified right to seek a provisional award of compensation. It is provided under the scheme that awards will be calculated by reference to the principles which govern the measure of damages in the law of tort. Where damages are claimed for tort in the ordinary courts, awards are not made on a provisional basis. Damages under the scheme will reflect the risk of future harm or deterioration even in claims for lump sums of compensation.

I also informed Positive Action that in relation to confidentiality the tribunal has advised solicitors that while it is not envisaged that an approach by it to an employer of a claimant will occur as a matter of routine, it reserves the right to do so. However, the tribunal will not do so without first reverting to the claimant or his/her solicitor if applicable.

In my letter to Positive Action on 7 March I also addressed the following additional concerns that have been expressed by the group recently, namely permanence of the compensation tribunal by way of contracts; and theex-gratia nature of scheme not to exclude judicial review. I stated in that letter that I have been advised by the Attorney General that the terms of any award made by the tribunal would be enforceable before the courts. I understand that when a provisional award is made the tribunal will issue a letter to the claimant specifying that the award is a provisional award and that the claimant may make a further application to it in the event that a particular serious consequence or consequences occur and specify the time period within which the claimant may apply. This letter to the claimant will support the legal contract which arises following the acceptance of a provisional award.

In relation to judicial review, I informed Positive Action in my letter of 7 March that I have been advised by the Attorney General that proceedings before the compensation tribunal will be subject to judicial review. As I have already indicated to the House, I am confident that the compensation tribunal will act with sensitivity and fairness in all cases.