Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

There is an urgent need to provide a replacement hospital for the National Maternity Hospital, Holles Street, where conditions are completely unacceptable. It is one of the busiest hospitals in Europe. Staff and patients must contend with extremely overcrowded, cramped and poor conditions in a building that clearly is not fit for purpose. In choosing a site at St. Vincent's University Hospital for the new national maternity hospital it seems that the issues of ownership and ethos were not even considered.

Given the complexities and financial exposure of the old-style model of healthcare in this country, whereby services were essentially outsourced mainly to religious bodies, what is needed now is a modern model of public and secular ownership of our healthcare facilities. Instead, the Minister for Health seems to regard the ownership and ethos of the new hospital as a matter to be decided by two private religious entities, namely, Holles Street and St. Vincent's. A private deal was done between these two entities without any regard to the public interest. The idea of a very valuable hospital asset funded by the taxpayer being gifted to a private entity is outrageous. That this private entity is a religious one is entirely unacceptable and flies in the face of the clearly expressed public opinion in this year's repeal referendum.

The new company, to be called the National Maternity Hospital at Elm Park DAC, will be 100% owned by St. Vincent's. Under Article 44 of the Constitution, a religious order can control what it owns, and this right has been upheld by the Supreme Court on a number of occasions. Therefore, irrespective of any assurances or the fanciful idea of a golden chair, the reality is that St. Vincent's will own and control the new national maternity hospital. This reality has now dawned on the Minister for Health who, we are told, is now seeking a public interest director for the board of the new company. I ask the Taoiseach to consider that we will have a new public hospital, to be funded by the taxpayer and operated using public money, and the Minister is pleading for one director on the board to protect the public interest. Apart from the fact that this constitutes an admission that the Mulvey report got it completely wrong, is it not pathetic that the Minister has put himself and taxpayers in this position? Will the Taoiseach now request the Minister to pursue the State purchase of the site at Elm Park in order that this much-needed hospital may be built as an entirely public and secular hospital, thereby protecting the public purse and ensuring that women have access to all health services provided under the law of the land, which should not be governed in any way by Canon Law? Alternatively, will he agree to compulsorily purchase this site and get on with the job?

See this speech in context