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

Is the Government not ashamed of that? What have matters come to that the Government is behaving in such an utterly disrespectful way?

I wish the Minister was here. I do not where he is. He is probably doing more media appearances. He is completing undermining this Parliament and our democracy. We were told two weeks ago that there was going to be a pause and an opportunity to address the key issues of public ownership and the phrase "clinically appropriate", which nobody understands.

We know after yesterday's meeting of the Joint Committee on Health that the Government has never, on any occasion, seriously approached St. Vincent's with a view to purchasing the site or getting St. Vincent's to gift it to the State. That was confirmed yesterday. It was confirmed today that in spite of all the promises, including those made by the Minister of State, Deputy Butler, that people would be reassured and there is no problem with the phrase "clinically appropriate", several people who are proponents of this project have said they are not sure exactly what it means. We have heard three different interpretations of the phrase. Last Thursday, the Minister of State, Deputy Butler, was beside the Minister when he accepted that we had a point. He said he would reflect on the issue and consider it over the weekend. There was endless spinning going on last weekend about some kind of definition, removing the phrase or adding a codicil, ridiculously. None of that meant anything and the proposal was today rammed through Cabinet.

The Government has said it will add a note to the memorandum to Cabinet. Adding a note, a letter from the Minister or a letter from anybody, carries no weight whatsoever in contract law. We have a number of legal documents which contain the phrase "clinically appropriate". Unless there is a definition of it, the meaning will continue to be highly ambiguous and will undoubtedly be challenged in the years ahead.

Where does this Government stand with regard to its supposed commitment to public healthcare and to Sláintecare? All the Government has been doing is paying lip service to that. Its decision today shows that it is not at all serious about Sláintecare and that it is engaged in the same thing St. Vincent's is engaged in, namely, promoting private healthcare. The Government has commissioned its own reports. The report of Dr. Donal de Buitléir came down strongly in favour of the separation of the two elements of public and private healthcare. Dr. Catherine Day also submitted a report. The Government is completely disregarding those significant reports.

The Government is now entering a contract with an organisation, St. Vincent's Holdings CLG, about which we know nothing. The Religious Sisters of Charity had to get approval from the Vatican to transfer its shareholding to that organisation. We know the Vatican agreed to the proposal, or petition as it is called, and we know nothing about what was contained in that petition. The Government is highly irresponsible in what it is doing. We are going to pay an enormous price for this in the future.

See this speech in context