Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the witnesses and thank them for their presentation. It is important a forum is offered to them to express their concerns about what they see as the wrong choice for the national children's hospital. There is no doubt we all agree on the need for a national children's hospital. In doing that, however, it must be put in the most appropriate location. We are here because the group suggests the choice of the St. James's site is not. They have outlined many reasons for it, some compelling. I am sure others will argue the opposite in support of the St. James's site.

Would any of the group have expressed views previously on the Mater site being the wrong one? It would strike me that if St. James's is considered wrong, then the Mater would have been equally problematic for the same reasons.

Dr. Fin Breathnach referred to the fact that I was in Melbourne when I was a Minister of State and saw the site of the children's hospital there. I did not travel specifically to see the site but I did take it upon myself when I was there to see it during the final stages of construction. It was in a beautiful parkland setting. The key issue, however, is about the services for sick children. Why is the group arguing that Blanchardstown will give a better outcome? Its submission stated locating the hospital at the St. James's site will result in avoidable deaths and disability of many newborn babies. That is quite a profound statement. Will the witnesses elaborate as to why this would be the case?

The group proposes the flipping of the site. In other words, the satellite hospital would be located in St. James's and the major hospital would be located in Blanchardstown. One can work out rough costings such as greenfield versus brownfield at around 25% and the cost of car parking. Has a detailed analysis been done by the group? The group claimed the relocating of the Drimnagh sewer at the St. James's site would cost €18 million. Has this been quantified by people who have experience in the costings of large projects?

The Dolphin report was commissioned after the Mater site was rejected by An Bord Pleanála and reported in June 2012. It is quite a detailed report in many ways which I read from cover to cover. It laid out many of the reasons for site location, not only for the physical building but the specialties within it, and the services to which Dr. Róisín Healy referred. Is the group saying the Dolphin report, or its terms of reference, was flawed in its assessment in deciding that St. James's was the right location? Why does the group believe the Dolphin report got it so wrong?

On public transport, and the lack of it, there is traffic congestion around St. James's. As the lead arbitrator, An Bord Pleanála felt these issues could be addressed and overcome in other ways. There are quite good public transport services to the St. James's' site. For example, Heuston and Connolly Stations are linked by the Luas which actually goes through the St. James's site. Does the group accept this may be important to many people who may wish to attend the site? I accept initial transportation to the proposed hospital would be by car or ambulance. However, for the parents and siblings of many patients who might be there for a long time, they may have the choice to use public transport directly to St. James's.

On the issue of bilocation versus a single modular stand-alone hospital, there is a proposal to put a maternity service in the St. James's site. Part of the strategy is for the Coombe maternity hospital to go there. I do not know whether that can be done, as I am not an expert in engineering or architecture. We are led to believe it can happen, however. Part of the longer term policy will see both maternity hospitals move from their present positions, namely, the Rotunda to Blanchardstown and the Coombe to St. James's. Does the Connolly for Kids Hospital group believe the Coombe maternity site could move in its entirety or would it just be the high-dependency maternity unit with the rest of the hospital remaining on the Coombe site?

Since I became my party's health spokesperson and being a political person, I have also found there is politics in medicine too. I remember during the debate around the Mater site that it was quite political, both in this forum and among medical professionals. Many made their arguments with genuine and compelling reasons. Is there any medical politics either in the context of the Dolphin report's recommendations or in the group's views that the report got it wrong?