FOLLOWING further revelations in the hepatitis C scandal, Fianna Fail has set today as the deadline for a reply from the Taoiseach, Mr Bruton, to questions on the State's handling of the Mrs Brigid McCole case.
In a press conference in Dublin last night, Fianna Fail's health spokesman, Mr Brian Cowen, said that if Mr Bruton fails to answer in full, "there are serious implications for this Government".
Pressed to reveal what these might be, Mr Cowen said he would await the replies and "on foot of that I will be able to make my own judgment".
He asked Mr Bruton to state how many medical experts were engaged to assess Mrs McCole's health for her court case and how many of them acted for all three defendants - the State, the BTSB and the NDAB. "Was any medical expert interviewed by the Chief State Solicitor and when did this occur?" he asked.
Speaking in Adare, Co Limerick last night, the Taoiseach rejected claims of a cover up, describing the Government and the BTSB as "separate actors" in the case. And the Minister for Health, Mr Noonan, accused Mr Cowen of issuing "bogus allegations" and claimed Fianna Fail was engaged in "despicable" exploitation of Mrs McCole's death.
The Irish Times reported on Saturday that the medical expert who assessed Mrs McCole's health for the BTSB was also acting for the State. Mr Noonan has insisted that the three defendants pursued separate legal strategies in the High Court damages case taken by the Donegal woman.
Rejecting the Minister's assertion, Mr Cowen put 11 questions to Mr Bruton asking him to explain, if there was no coordination between the parties, why did the BTSB make an offer to Mrs McCole on behalf of the State.
The report in The Irish Times and another in the Sunday Independent yesterday "flatly contradict" claims that the State and the BTSB acted independently in hepatitis C cases, Mr Cowen said. He sought an outline of the Attorney General's role in the McCole legal strategy, "the instructions which were given by the Government to the legal teams and the Chief State Solicitor".
"Will the Taoiseach go to the Minister for Health and ask him to explain why he has told the Dail that the defendants in the McCole case acted independently and without reference to one another as it is now clear the BTSB was not acting alone and there was crossover between the parties?", Mr Cowen asked.
The Taoiseach should also explain why the "offensive tactics" used in the McCole case were still being used against another hepatitis C victim, Mrs Mary Quinlan. Mr Bruton's "sincerity" in relation to clearing up the controversy would be seen in the fullness of his replies.
Meanwhile, Mr Noonan issued a statement last night specifically addressing the report in the Sunday Independent. It said that new evidence contradicted Government claims that the State and BTSB conducted independent legal strategies. It reported that BTSB solicitors had provided the Chief State Solicitor with a copy of its defence in a civil action taken by Mrs Quinlan.
Mr Noonan said that as the Quinlan case is to be heard on July 1st, it would be inappropriate for him to get involved. He said there was nothing unusual about the manner in which the State was conducting the Quinlan case.
The newspaper also said that solicitors acting for the BTSB, in its case against Mrs McCole, wrote a letter trying to dissuade her from proceeding with her case against the State and the National Drugs Advisory Board. The letter, from solicitors McCann Fitzgerald, said that if Mrs McCole discontinued her claim against the State and the NDAB, the BTSB would pay "such party and party costs as may be sought by those defendants or either of them".
But Mr Noonan said the issue of liability for costs referred to in that letter were totally misunderstood in the article "and by other commentators".
"If the issue of costs had not been settled at the time of the settlement, Mrs McCole would have been liable for the costs incurred by the State and the NDAB. This covering of costs by the BTSB was included to ensure that no liability for costs after the settlement had been agreed," Mr Noonan added. This was "normal legal procedure", he said.