Health Procurement: Motion Seanad Éireann — 2026-01-29 ============================================================ Alice-Mary Higgins (IND), National University of Ireland I have a strong feeling of support regarding the desire for a greater focus on and proper planning for genomics. For many people, diagnosing and identifying issues and patterns early is something they want because people are affected by such a range of conditions and diseases. There is significant value in genomics science. I recognise some of the concerns identified in the first sections of the motion. In particular, I note the concerns about overseas laboratories. The idea of a co-ordinated plan and achieving a 50% target is something to be welcomed. However, I have two concerns about the inclusion of accredited commercial laboratories in future procurement processes in line with public procurement directives to ensure open, competitive and cost-effective delivery. First, the word "quality" needs to be mentioned here. We know that quality is not a given in our procurement processes. I have submitted legislation that was passed by this House, which I was appreciative of, pointing to the issue of price-only or lowest-cost approaches leading to very poor outcomes and the need for a price-quality approach where we look at both the price and the quality and how this would lead not just to better outcomes, but better value for money in the bigger picture. We are aware of where this goes wrong, certainly in the area of diagnostics. The Scally report on the CervicalCheck programme identified an over-emphasis on achieving the lowest price from suppliers without an equivalent emphasis on quality and other measures as one of the key issues that led to the CervicalCheck scandal. It was an example of procurement that was done using a price-only or lowest-cost approach rather than a balance of cost and quality criteria. This is important. It is something that has had an impact. In the medical area, the machinery tends to get purchased based on both quality and cost but when it comes to services, there is sometimes a slide towards going for what is called the price-only or lowest-cost approach. Second, I have a concern about the commercial partners that are work at here. Genomic Medicine Ireland, GMI, was rebranded and renamed because there had been significant concerns about its operations. The State had invested in it and there were questions around where the data was being stored and whether the data was being stored outside of the GDPR context. In its rebranded form as Genuity Science, it has links to 25 facilities across Ireland, collaborations with many hospitals and universities and a very well-publicised goal of collecting data from up to 400,000 Irish people, and has made €85 million selling genetic data collected from Irish people since its establishment in 2017. An investigative report in 2020 pointed to the research deals and collaborations. Collaboration is something we would like to see to an extent, but the concern is in the letter of it. One of the agreements stated that GMI would own all intellectual property in and have exclusive rights to commercialise the GMI databases, the GMI genomic database results and the GMI discovery databases, and the universities, which are the partners that may be linked with the State, would not get access until 50% of the entire participant recruitment target was complete. This matters because we need a genomic strategy. We also need outcomes from the data gathered that is going to feed into a guarantee of improved public health and public good. Sadly, we saw during the Covid-19 pandemic where over €80 billion of public money was poured into the development of vaccines and yet, when it came to the crunch, there was a refusal to share access to that science and what came out of it with much of the world, which led to literally millions of deaths. I commend this House on supporting my motion at the time for a Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, TRIPS, waiver, which would have allowed the sharing of the intellectual property to save lives across the world. Sadly, the European Commission in its negotiations did not support a TRIPS waiver or access. This is why it is crucial to have these partnerships. It is not just about partnerships; it is also about the public interest and the public good. Outcomes that will serve humanity, not just in Ireland but internationally, rather than solely profit, need to be at the core of any agreements. It is still my preference that this be publicly led rather than overly reliant on commercial partners. --- Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted. Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/seanad/2026-01-29/debate/main Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:54:34+00:00 Sitting date: 2026-01-29