The Department of Health failed to meet its obligation to inform haemophiliacs of the infection risks associated with blood products, it was suggested at the tribunal yesterday.
Mr Paul Barron, an expert witness for the Department, said there was no evidence of it informing patients in 1983 of the potential risks from a "particularly dangerous" stock of US-sourced factor concentrate.
This was despite the Department's duty to do so under Council of Europe recommendations dealing with the threat of HIV.
An assistant secretary at the Department, Mr Barron was giving evidence on the basis of a review of documentation as he had no direct involvement in the matters under investigation.
In relation to the Council of Europe recommendations, he said there was evidence to suggest the Department took steps to ensure one of them, namely that relating to donor selection, was met. There was no evidence to indicate recommendations on avoiding the use of products sourced from large donor pools and informing physicians and patients of infection risks were followed up.
Mr Barron agreed the Department would have been aware in September 1983 that concentrates made in the US before the introduction of donor selection procedures were being shipped to Europe, and that the Department had a duty to inform patients of this. Yet, he said, he could find no evidence of the Department taking steps to tell patients or to ensure other agencies acted on the information.
Under examination by Mr Gerry Durcan SC, for the tribunal, Mr Barron agreed the information would have been important to haemophiliacs - if they had known about these "dangerous" concentrates they might have chosen to use a safer, locally made product, cryoprecipitate (cryo), instead.
The tribunal has heard most haemophiliacs were infected through imported concentrates, with only one confirmed case of HIV infection through cryo.
Regarding the Department's responsibility for the provision of services, Mr Barron said although the minister carried "political accountability" in the area, statutory responsibility rested with health agencies.
In relation to blood products, policy decisions were "primarily" a matter for the BTSB, although the Department did have an input, he said.
