Skip to content
PoliticalRepoPoliticalRepo

Ireland · Question · written

PQ 637

637. Deputy Réada Cronin asked the Minister for Health the prevalence of the already used incidence of PPS numbers in the vaccination schedule which is causing dismay to persons with the reasonable expectation of using their own PPS number for their own vaccination; the measures in place to protect persons’ PPS numbers and prevent such misuse; the reason PPS numbers are required for vaccination when they are not required for testing; if PPS numbers were required and used for vaccines delivered inappropriately such as outside of the schedule, for example, at hospitals (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23176/21]

askedIreland· Dáil Éireann· EN

Introduced

5 May 2021

Last action

Status

written

Sponsors

Subjects

Discovery layer

Source updated

5 May 2021

Summary

637. Deputy Réada Cronin asked the Minister for Health the prevalence of the already used incidence of PPS numbers in the vaccination schedule which is causing dismay to persons with the reasonable expectation of using their own PPS number for their own vaccination; the measures in place to protect persons’ PPS numbers and prevent such misuse; the reason PPS numbers are required for vaccination when they are not required for testing; if PPS numbers were required and used for vaccines delivered inappropriately such as outside of the schedule, for example, at hospitals (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23176/21]

This text is taken from the official record. PoliticalRepo does not editorialize.

Timeline

No timeline events have been ingested for this record yet.

Votes

No vote records are attached yet.

Versions

No version snapshots stored. Document URLs remain at the source.

Documents

1 official file

Vaccination Programme

View fileDownload file

Sponsors

No sponsors or actors listed by the source.

Related records

No cross-record relationships stored yet.

Sources

PoliticalRepo is an index and interpretation layer, not the authoritative legal source.