The doctor who received a leaked document from Tánaiste Leo Varadkar relating to a €210 million deal between the State and a GP group has said it was given to him as part of a pre-existing arrangement to share information.
A statement released on Sunday night by Dr Maitiú Ó Tuathail matches elements of the version of events outlined by Mr Varadkar on Saturday - including the contention that the content of the leaked document was largely finalised at the time he received it.
In the statement, Dr Ó Tuathail said the GP group he was president of at the time - the National Association of General Practitioners (NAGP) - had been involved in "extensive consultations" with the Department of Health and the HSE on the the chronic disease management programme, which was part of the deal ultimately agreed, throughout 2018.
However, the NAGP was not directly involved in the talks on the entirety of new deal, which were concluded ultimately with the Irish Medical Organisation, a rival group.
The statement, which was co-signed by Dr Andrew Jordan, who was former chairman of the NAGP, says the talks involved monthly meetings with both parties, and that the association was aware of the main content of the proposed new contract being sought by the State.
“We received a copy of the finalised, agreed and announced programme for chronic disease management from the then Taoiseach in mid-April. This was seen as a continuation of the decision by the Government to consult with the NAGP and its GP members and keep them informed throughout.”
The sensitivity of the information received, and the degree to which it might be seen as being largely signed off at the time the leak took place, is likely to be a key part of the political fallout from the controversy in the coming days.
While the NAGP had a copy of the document in their possession in mid April, they did not circulate it to members to promote acceptance of the proposed new agreement.
On Sunday, Dr Ó Tuathail said this was due to the internal issues faced by the organisation at the time.
The former NAGP leaders argue that their union, which disbanded in disarray following financial issues in 2019, could not adopt a position on the document “without full access to the details that it contained”.
“It was wrong for one group of GPs to have access to the details of a chronic disease management programme, and for another group of GPs not to have equal access to that information, given that the NAGP and its members were involved in its formation,” they said.
“The programme for chronic disease management was to be rolled out to all GPs, and therefore all GPs had a right to understand what the programme entailed, and what would be required of them.”
