REFORMING THE HEALTH SERVICE

Madam, - I refer to Mark Hennessy's articles of June 20th and 21st in which he states that "consultants will loose their veto…

Madam, - I refer to Mark Hennessy's articles of June 20th and 21st in which he states that "consultants will loose their veto on appointments of new colleagues" and that "[Prof Niamh\] Brennan deserves plaudits by the score" because she brought "into the open the ludicrous contract which allows many consultants get paid for letting other people do their work"

Consultants, through their membership of Comhairle na nOspidéal, do not have a veto on the appointment of new colleagues. Mr Hennessy should know that every consultant appointment, whether new or replacement and without exception, has to be sanctioned by the Department of Health before it is considered by Comhairle na nOspidéal. This protocol gives the Department control over the number of consultants in the public service.

I challenge Mr Hennessy to produce any reputable body of evidence to substantiate his claim that the number of consultants in the public service is depressed because of the alleged use of a veto by existing post-holders. Numerous reports produced by the consultant-dominated Comhairle na nOspidéal over the past 30 years have emphasised the need for extra consultants in every speciality up and down the country.

Every medical faculty, institute and society has made repeated submissions to the Department of Health calling for a doubling or tripling of the number of consultants in various specialities.

READ MORE

The most recent report from Comhairle na nOspidéal states that the number of neurologists would need to be more than doubled to bring us into line with EU norms. The IHCA has called many times over the past four years for the appointment of 1,000 extra consultants. People will believe what they wish but the facts speak for themselves.

Mr Hennessy's plaudits for Prof Brennan are also misplaced. Her misrepresentation of the practice of delegating work within hospitals to the point where she claims that consultants are fraudulently drawing significant salaries was comprehensively rebutted by Dr Colm Quigley on a recent Questions and Answers programme. We must be cautious never to confuse prejudice with evidence.

Is it not extraordinary, if Prof Brennan's contention is correct, that some hospital or health board manager has not succeeded over the past ten years in gathering sufficient evidence to demonstrate that at least one consultant is acting in the manner she alleges? After all, it is extremely easy to monitor consultants' work, both in terms of volume and the mix between public and private practice.

The solution to the problems in our hospital services and the wider health services does not rest in simply bashing consultants or giving them another type of contract.

Finally, the Deloitte and Touche Report of November 2001 verified that there was a significant body of evidence to demonstrate that the taxpayer does get value for money from our acute hospital services. - Yours, etc.,

FINBARR FITZPATRICK,

Secretary General,

Irish Hospital

Consultants Association,

Dundrum,

Dublin 14.