Department of Health secretary general Robert Watt has said he does not accept the findings of a review into a controversial proposed secondment of the then-chief medical officer (CMO).

“I’m very happy that the secondment process was appropriate,” he told the Oireachtas Committee on Finance.

“I don’t accept the report,” he added.

On Monday, an external review into the proposed secondment of Dr Tony Holohan to a post at Trinity College Dublin was published.

It said that there was a lack of formal consultation with the Taoiseach, Minister for Health and Department of Public Expenditure and Reform throughout the process.

It also said an associated annual commitment of two million euro in research funding to be allocated through the Health Research Board (HRB) was not based on any scope nor costings and that the HRB was not consulted.

The report said the proposed funding bypassed all accepted protocols for research funding and did not, in the author’s opinion, meet accepted norms of scrutiny, transparency and accountability.

It said the proposed secondment and associated research funding should not have been linked together.

It said the CMO should not have been exclusively personally involved in the negotiation of funding.

Following controversy over the proposed secondment, it did not take place.

The review also details differences in the accounts of Mr Watt and then-Department of the Taoiseach chief of staff Deirdre Gillane.

Dr Tony Holohan (PA/Brian Lawless)

Mr Watt told the review that he had informed Ms Gillane and that she was aware of “all the critical details” of the secondment, including the proposal to increase research funding.

He requested that comments relating to Government officials not being told be removed from the report.

“Based on the facts it is not accurate to suggest that Government or key players were not told,” he said.

In her submission to the review, Ms Gillane criticised some assertions made by Mr Watt as “grossly inaccurate and unwarranted”.

Appearing before the Oireachtas Committee on Finance on Wednesday, Mr Watt said those involved in the secondment were motivated by public interests.

Earlier, the Minister for Health said he accepted Ms Gillane’s timeline of events was correct but added he would not take any action towards Mr Watt.

Stephen Donnelly said those involved in the proposed secondment of former CMO Dr Holohan were acting in “good faith”.

At a select health committee meeting, Social Democrat TD Roisin Shortall said Mr Watt’s account was at “complete variance” with the then-taoiseach’s officials.

Addressing the minister, she said: “Surely you can’t allow that situation just to sit.

“A situation where the Taoiseach’s senior adviser is saying quite clearly that the account provided by your secretary general is not accurate.

“So whose account of events, minister, do you believe?”

Mr Donnelly said the report is very clear that Ms Gillane did not have the details until “much later in the day”.

“The report is very clear that Ms Gillane’s account of the timings is correct,” he said.

Ms Shortall asked the minister if he intended to take “any action” on that.

“I don’t, deputy,” he replied.

Ms Shortall said: “We can’t learn lessons unless there’s accountability for what has happened already.”

Minister for Health Stephen Donnelly (PA/Niall Carson)

Mr Donnelly said Mr Watt would appear before the Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform later on Wednesday.

“In terms of accountability, I believe he’ll be before the committee for several hours today, I think that he is a senior civil servant accounting to Oireachtas through that mechanism,” he said.

He said there may have been a “misunderstanding” in some of the testimony given.

Asked by Sinn Fein health spokesperson David Cullinane about his submissions to the review, Mr Donnelly said his main point was that, notwithstanding the letter of intent, there would still have been procedures before the allocation of funding.

Asked if he was “kept in the dark” until very late in the process, Mr Donnelly said the report is “quite clear” on timelines.

Mr Cullinane said established processes had not been followed.

“This was informal, and that informality has led, I think, to a lot of problems,” he said.

Mr Donnelly said he would not disagree with that.

“We always have to strive to improve at everything we do,” he said.

“I would just like to say that having spent a lot of time on us, I do believe that everybody involved was acting in good faith.

“I do believe that the proposed secondment, in fact probably most of us here believe that actually it would have been very valuable.”

Mr Donnelly said several things were done to ensure transparency and that lessons were learned from the process.

“The question is in the context of a proposed secondment that didn’t happen, so nothing actually happened in terms of any spending of money,” he said.