Mary Harney (Dublin Mid West, Progressive Democrats)

I must respond to this because the Deputy was talking about the privatisation of the health system and I am entitled to respond. I acknowledge that capital allowances are available for investment in these hospitals, but these allowances are available to make films with the support of all parties in this House. I do not see why capital allowances cannot be made available to support much-needed investment in health care.

This Bill is long overdue. The conflict of interest provisions introduced by me will ensure fair competition. Of course, patient safety comes first and we cannot have a business relationship between the dispensers and the prescribers. This is not to say that people cannot own properties. Deputy McManus made the point that, traditionally, pharmacies were located close to where doctors practise. This is the case and we are not seeking to prevent that. What I am seeking to do by way of amendments made by us is to ensure that where pharmacies and doctors' practices are co-located, normal market trends operate.

People talk about anchor tenants. The difference between an anchor tenant like a branch of Dunnes Stores in a shopping mall and an anchor tenant in this case is that, as one leaves Dunnes Stores, one does not get a piece of paper from it telling one to go to the bicycle shop or some other shop. I accept that using a butcher as an example might not be relevant because Dunnes Stores has its own butcher's section. There is a huge attraction if doctors and pharmacies are co-located and we must ensure nothing unethical happens in that relationship. This is why we produced the amendments we tabled yesterday.

I thank everybody who has contributed to the debate. In particular, I thank John McCluskey and Heather Mahon from the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel, as well as the officials I mentioned earlier, who have done an extraordinary amount of work in a short period to bring the Bill to this stage.

See this speech in context