On a related matter, a couple of months ago when news first broke about Government proposals to hand over governance and ownership of the new national maternity hospital to St. Vincent's Healthcare Group group, the public reacted with outrage and disbelief. That reaction centred on two points. The first was the inappropriateness of a religious group having any role in the governance of a public maternity hospital and the second was the profligate manner in which the Government viewed it is acceptable to gift a valuable asset — a State asset — to private interests.

We have not heard the Government, including the Minister, on this week's developments but we have heard from St. Vincent's Healthcare Group. It stated that, despite the departure of the Sisters of Charity, the terms of the Mulvey report would still apply. St. Vincent's Healthcare Group is a private corporate body. It has no right to dictate the Government's public policy. A public hospital funded by the public for public patients should, of course, remain in public ownership.

There is, however, a wider context for public disquiet over giving away a €300 million asset to this private body. The corporate entity known as St. Vincent's Healthcare Group has been under audit by the HSE for some time. Concerns relate to the entanglement of St. Vincent's University Hospital and St. Michael's Hospital, both public hospitals, on the one hand, and St. Vincent's Private Hospital, on the other, and to the suspected cross-subsidisation from public to private. The director general of the HSE told the Committee of Public Accounts in April 2015 that the private hospital was "being run on the back of the public hospital". He described it as having a "parasitic dependence on the public hospital", to such an extent that it may well not be viable as a public hospital in its own right. Many questions remain. The HSE still has not been informed about the detail of the charge created on St. Michael's Hospital by St. Vincent's Private Hospital in favour of Bank of Ireland. What about the financial arrangements within the group and the top-ups and salary scales in operation? A review of suspected breaches of contract in the context of consultants' work is to begin shortly.

St. Vincent's Healthcare Group epitomises many of the structural problems within the Irish health care system. The need to disentangle this dysfunction was a key recommendation of the Committee on the Future of Healthcare. Does the Tánaiste not accept that it would be highly imprudent to contemplate exacerbating the anomalous corporate governance arrangement within St. Vincent's Healthcare Group by adding yet another public hospital to its portfolio of assets?

The decisions that have been taken are extremely important in terms of the separation of the influence of any religious body on our health services. Everybody here will welcome the decision announced this week by the Sisters of Charity to end their involvement with the St. Vincent's Healthcare Group. It is a very significant development for the whole health care sector. It deals with the concerns raised regarding the question of religious influence in the new national maternity hospital. The sisters will relinquish their shareholding, and ownership will be transferred to a new company with charitable status, to be called St. Vincent's Hospital. The sisters have confirmed that they will not have any involvement in the new company or in the operation of the new maternity hospital. It is very important that this has been completely clarified. There is to be no influence within the hospital or the new body with charitable status. That is very important.

As the Deputy knows, there has been very extensive engagement on this issue under Mr. Kieran Mulvey and with the Minister.

The Minister continues to look at a number of issues and will be reverting. He should be given the remaining time to continue that work. The Deputy makes a broader point about the ownership of hospitals in this country. We do have a long history of a combination of having public hospitals as well as voluntary hospitals. We have at least 17 voluntary hospitals in this country and it is a well-established way of delivering services.

It should not be.

Deputy Shortall raised the question of whether that should be changed in the case of this particular hospital. There are complicated issues involved in that but, as the Deputy said, the health care report addresses this issue of the model we want to adopt going forward. The Deputy used the phrase "to disentangle". In terms of disentangling this issue, there are complex funding decisions to be taken into account. There is also the matter of service delivery. So many services are delivered in this country by voluntary hospitals. There is a lot of support for voluntary hospitals. The debate certainly began on the system that was being suggested for St. Vincent's. We have come to a very clear outcome on that, and a very important outcome. It is absolutely the right outcome. In terms of the broader issue of the combination of public hospitals and voluntary hospitals that we are going to have in this country going forward, I believe there is a political discussion to be had on that. There are many different elements to it.

If the Tánaiste is accepting that point, why would she then add to the complexity by handing over a public asset to a private organisation? This is not just a question of a voluntary hospital, it is a question of two public hospitals within a private corporate entity. In the case of the children's hospital, which will be on the grounds of St. James's, nobody suggested for a moment that St. James's should own it. Does anybody in Government actually know what the financial status is of the different elements of the St. Vincent's Healthcare Group? Can the Tánaiste clarify the status of the Mulvey report? Can she guarantee that public money will only be used in the public interest and that the Government will ensure that the public purse is protected by ensuring that the new national maternity hospital will remain in public ownership? That is a key point. It would be most unwise on financial grounds for the Government to contemplate doing anything else.

I believe is very important that this project gets built without the delay. I am sure the Deputy is familiar with the circumstances in which care is being delivered to pregnant women in Holles Street at present. Staff do an amazing job but there are very poor conditions. Now that this issue of the role of the Sisters of Charity has been resolved, I believe the priority is to get this hospital built.

What about ownership issue?

Many negotiations have taken place to ensure that we can arrive at that point. The Minister is still considering some of the outstanding issues the Deputy has raised. Of course, public money will only be used to ensure a quality health care service. That is very clear from the arrangements that have been made for the transition. The transition is to a body that has a charitable status. That is the reality of the situation. It is St. Vincent's charitable status. It is not anything else. It is to ensure that health care is delivered to the public and that the highest standards are met for pregnant women and for women who need maternity and obstetric services. I believe it is important that we move ahead. I do acknowledge that the Deputy is making a broader point but with regard to the particular circumstances, a huge amount of work has been done in order to allow this hospital to go ahead at this site now.