I thank the Deputy for raising what is a very important issue. I appreciate her party's support for the Government's position on this and that of the Minister for Health because a lot was at stake here, not just for maternity services but for the entire edifice that should govern public health and the provision of public health into the future in our acute tertiary system. The Government took a decision following negotiations in respect of the public-only consultant contract, which is a cornerstone of the Sláintecare framework and policy. In our view, our very clear reading of this was that it was an attempted breach of the fundamental position regarding the public-only consultant. We were very clear from the beginning. The Minister was very clear from the beginning and I was 100% behind her in respect of her position, having been in the last Government with the previous Minister, the former Deputy Donnelly, in negotiating this contract, which was signed off by the representative organisation of the consultants, the Irish Hospital Consultants Association, IHCA. People cannot sign contracts and then casually deviate from those contracts. On the question of safety, in my view, the private model of care in obstetrics and maternity is not sustainable. It has not been sustainable for a long time. The State had to intervene a long time ago - well over 20 years ago - in terms of indemnifying obstetricians and gynaecologists in respect of maternity care, given that the insurance costs and so on were just not sustainable for any individual consultant. I recall when we built the maternity hospital in Cork, which is actually a very good example. In fact, in Cork, you had a ridiculous situation where if you went to the Bon Secours Hospital, when it was private, and there was a complication, you were sent straight away to the Erinville Hospital, the public hospital, because it was the only hospital that had a neonatal. That was a fairly rudimentary neonatal at the time because I recall having to make decisions around all of that subsequently. When we decided to build a maternity hospital in Cork, the Bon Secours Hospital acknowledged that it would not be able to sustain as a private maternity hospital.
Sentiment score: 0.36
I will make my point generally. There is an issue here. We are very clear; we support what the Deputy is saying and, as far as we are concerned, a private model is not sustainable in maternity and, therefore, we want to build and develop hospitals where there is universal access and where, eventually, we will move to public-only consultants. Some have opted out of that, and that is their entitlement under the agreement. The patient should be refunded because this should not have happened in the first instance. These contracts were transparently signed up to by all concerned, including the hospital with regard to its service level agreement with the HSE.
Sentiment score: 0.29
I did answer the question. I said the money should be refunded. I made that clear in my original reply. The Minister is concerned about the operation of the public-only consultant contract throughout the entirety of the health service and in all hospitals. There is no going back from the position that we negotiated fully, transparently and comprehensively. Over the last five years, there has been an extraordinary level of investment in our health service at a scale that has dwarfed anything the previous-----
Sentiment score: 0.05
I made it clear that they should be refunded. The Minister has also sought assurances on that front.
Sentiment score: 0.36
The investment has been substantial in the last five years. In terms of the Deputy's question about Sláintecare, I do not think what she said about the lack of investment was fair. We could continue to invest more and more in health, but anybody looking at the last five years will see an extraordinary uptick and scaling up of investment in the public health service.
Sentiment score: 0.07
I appreciate the Deputy has raised quite a range of issues. I will take Israel, Gaza, the West Bank and the Middle East first. Ireland has taken a stand against Israel internationally and that is well recognised internationally and within the European Union. We continue on the humanitarian side to give very substantive contributions to the Palestinian Authority and UNRWA – close to €150 million at this stage. Of course we have also recognised the State of Palestine. We also intervened in South Africa's International Court of Justice case against Israel under the Genocide Convention. We made a submission, by the Attorney General, to the International Court of Justice on the legal consequences of Israel's actions in the occupied territories. Subsequently, we co-sponsored a resolution at the UN General Assembly seeking to implement the court's advisory opinion. We have been evacuating sick children, along with other countries, from Gaza. We have supported about 300 people to leave Gaza to travel to Ireland since the crisis began, and we have done much more than that. On the match involving the Football Association of Ireland, UEFA and FIFA have their rules for members of their organisations. Their rules provide that the national football governance bodies must act independently and be free of political interference. A series of countries have been suspended from international competition in the past because of political interference. That is the reality of it. I am not involved with FIFA, or UEFA for that matter, but I believe the Deputy is correct in saying that, at EU level, we should be dealing in a more robust and stronger way in terms of suspending the EU-Israel Association Agreement. I have just met the High Representative for foreign affairs, Kaja Kallas, and have been making that point. I think she is appreciative of the very strong feeling of opinion in Ireland in respect of that. The challenge has been to try to win over a critical majority of member states to that opinion. We have written to the EU Council. I want the issue on the EU Council's meeting next week and we want to see if we can get a vote on the issue of the suspension of that association agreement. That is the Government taking its role. The problem for the FAI and the football team, and it should not be on them, is that there will be consequences for the football team. To be fair to the Irish football team, it has made a lot of ground recently. It has had good success and is building on that platform. I do not control FIFA, which I think should deal with this globally, as should UEFA in its remit, but the bottom line could be that the football team suffers in terms of seedings and all the rest. That would have repercussions down the line for other competitions ahead. We need to act at European level. I think that is a far more effective way of dealing with the issue.
Sentiment score: 0.16
I did not get a chance to deal with every issue but I will come back to the Deputy.
Sentiment score: -0.10
I reject what Francesca Albanese said. I have significant issues with much of what she has said on this issue, in terms of Ireland in particular. We will work with the European Commission in respect of Aughinish. The Deputy said many jobs are at stake and a solution must be found. Let all of us be honest in the House. We will work with the Commission. We are conscious that there are about1,000 people directly depending on it from a jobs perspective. It is not going to be simple. If a call is made one way or the other, the repercussions will be what they will be. I do not think the Deputy should try to sugar-coat it to say there is a magical way to find a solution to this, and everything will be all right on the other side. We are not in that space. We will engage with the European Commission because there was a view that Aughinish is important for the alumina supply chain in Europe. It is a European competency. Europe decides what gets sanctioned and Europe decides what we do not put on the sanctions list. Europe did not put alumina on the sanctions list, no more than it put-----
Sentiment score: 0.11
I thank the Deputy for raising this important issue. We have made a lot of progress in the country with regard to wastewater treatment facilities. I am of the view that it should be tertiary and not secondary where possible. I am not aware of the specifics of the actual proposal for the wastewater facility earmarked for Foynes. I will check with Uisce Éireann on this. It may not be a waste of money because I presume it can be designed and constructed with a view to adding. Let us not look a gift horse in the mouth on one level. We need more treatment plants, particularly if planning has been secured and so on. We just need to get infrastructure in place. There may be funding issues. There may originally have been cost issues, although we have substantially increased the allocation to Uisce Éireann now and into the foreseeable future through the national development plan. I will ask. The Deputy is absolutely correct that tertiary treatment is the optimal way to go to ensure quality of water, particularly where it is discharged into the river, which has implications for ecology, biodiversity and human health. We will respond to the Deputy's query. I will seek a response from Uisce Éireann on the specifics of the proposal.
Sentiment score: 0.15
I also pay tribute to Marion Fossett and the Fossett family for their extraordinary contribution to Irish life. I remember attending Fossett's Circus as a young child. Some might say I learned a few tricks from that experience.
Sentiment score: -0.08
Our thoughts and prayers are with them on this sad day for the family. We thank them for what they do. On the wastewater treatment plant, from what I can see, Uisce Éireann is now engaging in extensive works. The Foynes sewerage scheme will include a new wastewater treatment plant and 3.5 km of new pipelines to convey wastewater to and from the new treatment plant site and an upgraded terminal pumping station with storm storage and an extension to the existing marine outfall will be constructed. It is fairly significant in and of itself.
Sentiment score: 0.07
I will make the point that, on location, there may be people for or against any given location but someone has to decide on a location from an objective engineering and wider planning perspective. I know of a wastewater treatment plant whose location was decided by one vote but, 30 years later, no one has complained. It did the job and it was the correct decision at the time.
Sentiment score: -0.25
There was a lot of heat around that decision.
Sentiment score: 0.00