Debate contribution: Statutory Duty of Candour

Debate contribution by Mrs Diane Dodds on 11 November 2024.

MLA

Mrs Diane Dodds

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

11 November 2024

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Statutory Duty of Candour

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4667823

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I thank the proposers of the motion and the amendment for the opportunity to contribute to a very important debate. Since joining the Health Committee in February of this year, I have met and talked to a wide range of individuals who have been dreadfully let down by the healthcare system in Northern Ireland. They have found it impossible to get answers, but, for many, knowing the truth of their loved one's situation is of paramount importance. It is harrowing for those who have lost loved ones to have to fight long, protracted legal battles in order to get truth and accountability. In the hyponatraemia inquiry, which reported in 2018, Mr Justice O'Hara spoke of:

"honesty in reporting, professionalism in investigation, focus in leadership and respect for parental involvement".

In a response to my colleague Joanne Bunting on 26 September of this year, the Minister indicated that 11 of the actions relating to a duty of candour arising from Justice O'Hara's report had been put into a Being Open framework policy that is currently under development. I hope that, today, he hears our frustration at the fact that there are no conclusions to this. It is hard to tell what progress has been made; maybe he will outline that in his response. As a Health Committee, we have met relatives of the deceased patients of Michael Watt and have taken evidence from those involved in the infected blood inquiry. I also reference the 17,500 women in the Southern Trust who have had smear tests reviewed because of underperformance in the reading of such tests. The trust was aware of those issues since 2008. Today, I think specifically of the husband and family of Erin Harbinson, who passed away recently after a battle with cervical cancer. Erin's smear was misread in 2012, 2015 and 2018. Erin was diagnosed in 2021 and received her smear audit only in 2023 — one month before the trust had to issue the 17,500 letters. There should also be an independent inquiry to establish the facts around that. Families have been left deeply hurt, traumatised and grieving but with prolonged fights in order to ascertain the truth. When we consider all of that, it is understandable that relatives of patients so grievously impacted should be asking for a statutory and legally enforceable duty of candour. Honesty, integrity and transparency with patients and families are key in establishing trust in our health service. Let us also be clear that our healthcare workers are not only highly skilled and trained but committed and caring individuals who go above and beyond to give exceptional care to their patients. They operate in a fast-moving and extremely challenging environment where they are often understaffed and under-resourced. We should pay tribute to their professionalism and care for their patients. On Friday, I met the Royal College of Nursing (RCN). It is clear that there is anxiety among staff as to how an individual duty would work in practice, given the level of risk that they operate under daily. As we discuss the motion, we need to acknowledge that the overwhelming majority of healthcare professionals do their best and serve the public in a difficult environment. We also need to acknowledge that modern healthcare is incredibly complex, that the risk element is high and that not all decisions will have a successful outcome. In response to the consultation on a duty of candour, in 2021, the DUP welcomed Justice O'Hara's report and asked for it to be implemented in full. On the individual duty, the DUP said:

“We are minded to support the introduction of the statutory individual duty of candour, but believe that further work should be undertaken to identify and resolve any potential unintended consequences before such an instrument is formally introduced. The consequential question is whether failure to comply with this duty in more extreme circumstances should mean the possibility of criminal sanctions for breach of duty. Again, we are supportive in principle of this but want to ensure that it is firmly underpinned by an evidence-based approach involving a wide range of interested parties.”

We went on to say that we would continue to engage with professional interests and other stakeholders on the crucial aspects of the proposed legislation. Colleagues, that remains our position. We really thought that, by now, we would have seen that proposed legislation.

Minister, you should move to legislate for the recommendation of Justice O'Hara's report —

— and my colleague Mr Frew stands ready to do so, if you are not.

757 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:35 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification