John Minihan (Progressive Democrats)

Although this was made crystal clear three weeks ago, Fine Gael does not want to let the facts get in the way of its agenda. It is sad that we cannot have a clear and realistic debate.

The Opposition's motion deliberately gives the impression that land is being made available, with no strings attached to private developers. It is not. Even if the Opposition dosed not want to listen to me or to the Tánaiste the tender notice published by the HSE on 19 May, prior to the tabling of this motion makes the conditions clear. The e-tenders website is open to the public. The tender document states that the contract will include:

. . . restrictions in relation to the use and management of the site. Tenderers will bear full risk, cost and responsibility for the construction and operation of the new hospital facilities. The hospitals will be private hospitals who, in addition to providing private medical health care services, will be required at the discretion of the contracting authorities to enter into contractual arrangements for the provision of medical services to the contracting authorities.

The Labour Party base its objection on the nonsensical belief that this initiative is some form of privatisation. That is incredible. How can anyone describe getting the private sector to create 1,000 additional public hospital beds as privatisation? It beggars belief. The party has some problem with both the private and public sectors investing in new hospitals and new public beds. The Labour Party's rusty statism creates an automatic reflex against private investment, without recourse to analysis or the application of logic. The taxpayers must be made aware that the Labour Party is determined that they alone must pay for every single new public hospital bed, including those beds reserved for private patients.

While the Labour Party's position on this worthy and commendable initiative is typically and unsurprisingly potty, Fine Gael's position is a little more puzzling. The former Fine Gael health spokesperson, Deputy Olivia Mitchell, said in May 2004:

It is only with the introduction of competition that we can capture for patients the benefits of the market and ensure that the health services benefit from innovation, from financial and operational efficiencies, from the use of technologies, has the incentives to control costs, improve standards and of all of the other dynamic benefits that operate automatically in the system in which competition flourishes . . . I believe [private provision] is the direction in which we must go. Otherwise there are simply no inbuilt incentives to provide value for money, to innovate, to respond to changing demands, changing circumstances.