Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 5 Apr 2000

Vol. 517 No. 4

Irish Haemophilia Society.

Ms McManus

I am grateful for this opportunity to raise this matter with the Minister for Health and Children. Nothing explains better why the Lindsay tribunal must take place and why haemophiliacs must be present at it than the story of 13 year old John Kelly. As a baby he was diagnosed as haemophiliac and with modern medical treatment there was no reason John could not have lived a normal life. Instead he died of AIDS. He was infected with the HIV virus by contaminated Factor 8 injections. The product designed to keep him alive was his death sentence. John Kelly's father, Ray, wants to know why his son died. He is entitled to that much. Having lost his son, is he now going to have to run the risk of paying for the privilege of finding out why he died?

That is what the Irish Haemophilia Society is facing and that is why the society has formally requested the Minister for Health and Children to make an application to seek a postponement of the tribunal. This request has not been made lightly. It is made for genuine reasons and it follows the failure of the Minister to deal with the concerns of the IHS about costs. These concerns forced the society to instruct its solicitors to cease preparations for the tribunal in February. In the absence of a resolution of the financial issue, the society was unwilling to instruct its solicitors to resume for fear the executive might become personally liable for costs.

More than anyone, haemophiliacs and their families want to see the full hearings of the tribunal begin because of the uncertain future of those affected by HIV and hepatitis C. This stark urgency is evidenced by the sudden death of another member in the last fortnight. His death has brought to 63 the number of haemophiliacs who have died so far from contaminated blood products. The society has limited resources and is desperately worried about the implications if the tribunal fails to award all costs. For four months they have sought to resolve the issue.

The Minister may well be a prisoner of his officials and the Attorney General, but he holds the key to resolving the impasse. The society has asked for an assurance from him. Some progress has been made in the latest offer on costs built up before the tribunal began. However the society's fundamental concern about a potential shortfall when the tribunal is over has not been addressed. The Minister tried to muddy the waters in interviews I heard early today. He repeatedly suggests that the society wants a blank cheque but it is more than willing to build in safeguards and I understand has informed the Minister of this. Even if a fraction of the costs were refused the Irish Haemophiliac Society would be bankrupt and John Kelly's father and others like him would be exposed to liability.

The society initiated court proceedings to challenge the tribunal's decision not to award the society its costs. I understand the State waited until today to lodge a defence and the society is forced to lodge a motion for discovery against the Attorney General. This court action could be avoided if the Minister provided the society with the letter of comfort it needs. No other player in this tragedy is exposed to costs in the way the innocent victims and their families are. I urge the Minister to replace the contempt with which these people have been treated with the compassion they deserve.

Mr. Martin

I thank the Deputy for raising this issue and allowing me the opportunity to express my views. What has happened to haemophiliacs is a tragedy, a personal tragedy for individuals and a family tragedy for those who have seen relatives die or who are taking care of relatives who are desperately sick as a result of infection with HIV and hepatitis C.

It is important that people with haemophilia and their families tell their story to the tribunal of inquiry. It is vital that through the tribunal we find out if this tragedy could have been avoided. It is crucial that we get to the truth and learn a grim lesson for the future. Nothing like this can ever happen again. I, therefore, have no choice. I must be concerned about anything which would prevent the discovery of that truth or hamper people in establishing in public the full implications of what has happened to them.

Because of that concern I have met the society, listened to, worked and made real progress with it towards resolving the issues that might prevent it participating in the Lindsay tribunal of inquiry. At all times my priority has been to do all in my power to ensure the society can and will participate in the tribunal. Therefore, when Judge Lindsay ruled in December that the tribunal did not have the jurisdiction to make an interim order for costs in favour of the society, my Department immediately indicated that we would consider providing remuneration to legal representatives of the society appearing at public sittings of the tribunal. Just three days later my Department took the initiative and made an offer of exceptional financial assistance to the society to which it did not formally respond. It had instituted legal proceedings against the tribunal, Ireland and the Attorney General in relation to the chairperson's ruling on costs.

On 15 February the society asked for an urgent meeting with me to discuss its financial position. I agreed to meet it immediately. The society outlined its situation to me. Its accountant had advised that he believed the bill for the outstand ing legal fees and costs from its solicitors would exceed its assets. Without an undertaking from a third party to fund those costs, estimated by the society to amount to approximately £1 million, the accountant's opinion was that the society, a limited company, was insolvent. I had further meetings with it on this and on 1 March came through to it with a revised offer of financial assistance that took into account its financial position; in other words, it dealt with historical costs.

The offer of 1 March went further. It also took into account the society's request for funding to retain medical and scientific personnel to provide expert advice during the course of the tribunal. This offer removed the immediate threat of insolvency. The society acknowledged this. However it then raised the issue of possible future financial exposure if there was a shortfall in costs awarded by the tribunal at the end of the inquiry. It is a matter for the tribunal to award costs in whole or in part and it has already indicated that the society can have a considerable expectation of being awarded its costs at the conclusion of the inquiry. Because I am committed to ensuring the society participates in the tribunal I went further and presented it yesterday with the following offer.

The society may claim its historical legal costs incurred in negotiations with my Department on hepatitis C related issues. I have agreed that in the event of any failure to agree on legal costs I will execute a requisition to tax these costs, which would mean £300,000 for the society or perhaps more. I offered £150,000 in respect of preparatory work undertaken by the society's legal advisers prior to the establishment of the tribunal of inquiry. I offered to advance funds to the society to allow it pay 75% of the brief fees and 75% of the refresher fees in respect of retaining two senior counsel and two junior counsel for the duration of the tribunal. I offered to advance funds to the society to pay a daily fee of £500 in respect of the attendance of its solicitor at sitting days of the tribunal. I offered to establish a fund of up to £150,000 to allow the society to retain expert medical and scientific personnel.

The total package, excluding ongoing legal fees, comes to £600,000. Taken in the context of the society having a considerable expectation of being awarded its costs at the conclusion of the inquiry, it will be clear that I have been at pains to remove its real fear of insolvency. I have been and continue to be accessible, open and sympathetic to the society. I am aware of public concern about legal fees related to tribunals and while I must take that issue into account, my priority continues to be and has always been to find ways to ensure haemophiliacs and their families bring their truth to the tribunal and are heard by the nation. I am very anxious that haemophiliacs should participate in the tribunal. It remains for the society and the Department to find a mechanism which will ensure the full participation of the society in a tribunal which will be the key to establishing the truth and preventing future tragedy. I am committed to finding such a mechanism and I have no reason to doubt that the society is equally committed.