Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
LAST UPDATE | 7 May 2022
QUESTIONS AROUND THE ownership of the site of the new National Maternity Hospital have again come to the fore this week as Cabinet looks set to approve the relocation of the crucial healthcare facility in the weeks ahead.
The relocation to a site on the grounds of St Vincent’s Hospital in Dublin has proved highly controversial as, until recently, the site was owned by the Religious Sisters of Charity.
The religious congregation has now transferred its ownership and if the relocation plan goes ahead the State would lease the land for 299 years.
Why are people concerned about the ownership?
Last week, St Vincent’s Healthcare Group (SVHG) completed the legal transfer of the Sisters of Charity’s shareholding in the group to the new company, St Vincent’s Holdings CLG, paving the way for the maternity hospital to be built at the Elm Park site.
Campaigners and opposition political parties have raised a number of concerns about the proposed deal.
Some say the fact that the land is owned by a company connected to a religious entity means it could fail to deliver elements of healthcare, such as abortion and IVF, that are legal in Ireland but not approved by the Catholic church.
The structure of the deal has also been criticised with various queries raised, including why the site is being leased and whether it could be bought with a compulsory purchase order.
The history of abuse scandals involving religious orders, particularly regarding institutions such as Magdalene Laundries and industrial schools, has led others to say that religious organisations should have no involvement in the provision of women’s healthcare.
The Department of Health has repeatedly stated that all procedures that are currently provided at the National Maternity Hospital under Irish law will be provided in the new NMH if it relocates to the Dublin 4 site.
This includes termination of pregnancy, provision of contraception services including tubal ligation, fertility services and gender reassignment procedures.
Who are the Religious Sisters of Charity?
The group was set up early in the 19th century with the aim of serving the needs of the poor in Dublin.
Over the course of 200 years, it grew to have around 150 communities spread across four continents. The group is involved in healthcare, education and charity work with homeless people and asylum seekers.
The Sisters live in the local community to which they are assigned and the order remains centrally governed from Dublin.
The Sisters were involved in five industrial schools and two Magdalene laundries.
They were one of the religious orders included in the Ryan Report (the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse). The report, published in 2009, detailed vast amounts of abuse at religious institutions over the course of decades.
The report notes that the Sisters of Charity have never issued a general public apology in respect of child abuse. However, the order has issued three specific apologies relating to the criminal convictions of staff members.
Have they paid redress for involvement in institutional abuse?
A total of 18 religious congregations have offered to pay €480 million of the €1.5 billion costs of the institutional child abuse redress scheme set out in the Ryan report.
Under an agreement worked out in 2002, the Sisters of Charity were to transfer three properties (worth €11.8 million) to help pay the costs. One of those properties has yet to be transferred.
The congregation has also paid €2 million in cash and €3 million in waived legal fees.
Will the nuns be involved in the operation of the hospital?
As this controversy has rumbled on over the course of several years, health ministers, civil servants, masters of the National Maternity Hospital and SVHG (which operates St Vincent’s and other hospitals) have all insisted that the religious order will have no input in the operation of the maternity hospital.
Health Minister Stephen Donnelly said this week that “multiple layers of legal governance protections and structures” have been put in place to ensure that all lawfully permitted procedures, including abortion, will be allowed at the hospital.
The Department of Health also insisted that no representatives of the Sisters of Charity would sit on the board of the hospital.
However, former NMH master Dr Peter Boylan has continuously raised objections about the ownership structure.
This week he wrote to Taoiseach Micheál Martin to again raise concerns, including that the Vatican would have had to sign off on the Sisters of Charity transferring their shareholding in the hospital site to a new charity, St Vincent’s Holdings.
Dr Boylan argues it is “clearly not possible” for the government to make any commitment that Catholic ethos will not govern the hospital.
This view has been disputed by Minister Donnelly, the Department of Health and SVHG.
While SVHG acknowledged that the Sisters of Charity sought approval from the Vatican to transfer their shareholding in the group to St Vincent’s Holdings, it said the Vatican had no say or influence in the establishment of the new company, the appointment of its directors or how it will operate.
“No negotiations took place between SVHG, the Catholic Church or the Vatican and no
instructions (hidden; implied or otherwise) were conveyed to the SVHG board in relation to SVH CLG, nor would they have been countenanced,” it said in a statement.
If a Catholic ethos is impacting the care provided could the government take action?
The Department of Health says the Minister for Health will have the power to ensure that all legal procedures are available.
It says the constitution of the company that will run the hospital (NMH DAC – which is part of SVHG) states that the health minister “has the power to direct its Board to ensure that any maternity, gynaecological, obstetrical or neonatal service which is lawfully permissible in the State will be available in the hospital, without religious ethos or ethnic or other distinction.”
The constitution sets out that the Minister will own a ‘Golden Share’ in the company and will nominate three members of its Board of nine.
Dr Boylan is among those who have argued that this is not sufficient to ensure that all procedures will be available.
What do we know about St Vincent’s Holdings CLG, the charity the Sisters transferred their shares to?
Last week, St Vincent’s Healthcare Group completed the legal transfer of the Sisters of Charity’s shareholding in the group to a new company, St Vincent’s Holdings CLG.
The new company is a not-for-profit group with charitable status.
Its directors are Professor Michael Keane, respiratory consultant at St Vincent’s private hospital, Dr David Brophy, vascular and interventional radiologist at St Vincent’s Hospital, and Sharen McCabe, director of McCabes Pharmacy.
These directors hold the shares in St Vincent’s Holdings, which in turn owns its shares in SVHG.
The Sisters of Charity and the Department of Health said that the order will have no role in the future of the new charity or the new National Maternity Hospital.
Boylan argues that the charity is approved by the Vatican and has Catholic values.
SVHG says the independent directors are restricted in what they can do and they are legally required to act in the best interests of the Group.
“The Religious Sisters of Charity and the Vatican have no say in the appointment of Directors or anything to do in the operations of the Group,” SVHG said.
Can a compulsory purchase order be made on the site?
The use of a compulsory purchase order (CPO) has long been touted as a potential solution to the controversy surrounding the St Vincent’s site.
As outlined in this explainer article from 2017, there are several obstacles that would have to be overcome if a CPO was to be used.
This includes lengthy delays due to legal proceedings, potentially going all the way to the Supreme Court, and compensation costs.
How much is the rent? €10 or €850,000?
Earlier this week the Taoiseach said the hospital would effectively be in public ownership due to annual rent of €10.
However, the lease defines the rent as: “€850,000 per annum or such revised rent as may be payable in accordance with the provisions of this Lease from time to time.”
It then says that the rent “shall be abated to €10 per annum”, as long as six conditions are met.
These are the conditions:
Róisín Shortall has been among those raising questions about the potential for rental costs to increase dramatically.
The Social Democrats co-leader asked in the Dáil: “If St Vincent’s Holdings is magnanimously offering an annual rent of €10, can the Minister explain why this punitive penalty clause exists?”
In response, Transport Minister Eamon Ryan echoed the Taoiseach’s line that €10 per year for 300 years was “akin to ownership”.
When the lease ends, could the Sisters of Charity take back control of the site?
As with all such agreements, when the 299-year lease ends the land and any remaining building will revert to the freeholder.
However, that won’t roll around until 2321 and health officials say that is far in excess of the useful life of this hospital.
Why is the co-location of a maternity hospital with a regular hospital deemed preferable to a stand-alone maternity hospital?
In Ireland, there’s a long-term plan to co-locate all stand-alone maternity hospitals with adult hospitals.
A Department of Health spokesperson said the NMH is the first priority because the current facility on Holles Street, Dublin, is “simply inadequate in every respect”.
Women giving birth sometimes need emergency care and co-location helps facilitate this.
The spokesperson noted that every year, several hundred pregnant women are transferred to St Vincent’s Hospital for treatment that is not available at Holles Street.
Up to 10 critically ill women are also transferred to receive intensive care that’s not available at Holles Street, on an annual basis.
Showing his true colours.. This is the church that so many defend here.
@Dell:
Don’t label Pedophiles, Sadists and self serving liars such as this Pope as Christians, they are anything but true Christians, no true Christian would defend clerical abuse nor its cover ups.
@Eleanor of Aquitaine: but if Christians and their leaders defend and hide them doesn’t that make them as bad
@Eleanor of Aquitaine: but anyone who remains a member of the Catholic cult in light of it’s recent history is culpable too. By staying as a members, all catholics are part of the problem and by association complicit in the cover up.
@ChuckE: not all Christians are catholic
@Dell: Crocodile Tears of ‘Papa’.!!!
@Mairtín: exactly. But you know he and all the others didn’t know.. They didn’t get any reports or hear so much as a whisper of it..
@Mr. Fantastic: when I said you I meant people following any religion while criticising another
@Mr. Fantastic: I should have said they, my apologies in being unclear
@Mr. Fantastic: If someone relentlessly defends a Church that shelters child abusers, they’re unlikely to be a fan of child abuse but they’re definitely a huge part of the problem.
That much is certain. Anyone who is trying to shirk the disgusting past and present of this institution is betraying the victims of abuse. Any ‘real’ Catholic wouldn’t be defending the Church at this stage, they’d be vocal critics, as many are.
@Mr. Fantastic: your argument would be fine if it was one leader or a handful of leaders or if it was for one period of time. This has been from the church’s beginnings and has been systematic. People burying their heads in the sand is not good enough anymore.
@Dermot Lane: It may be easy to say, and it may even be easy to accuse, but for some people, and especially a part of the older generation…being Catholic is a part of their identity. The beliefs, the ideals, the shared experiences with family members, friends, their local church and community…and which is actually personal and not tied up with the larger scandals which have embroiled the church. I was brought up a Catholic…like the vast majority of us here…like the vast majority of Irish people. It is just something which is part of the fabric of our lives, especially the formative years. And yes, I realize that for some people those formative years were tragically and unforgivably violated in the most brutal and evil fashions by some member of the Catholic clergy, and there was a systematic cover up by the Administration of the church and Vatican….but that entity is something which is largely divorced from the average Catholic. The average Catholic is somebody who is part of a community linked by faith and beliefs, by shared experiences and a devotion to something bigger than themselves…which is their faith, their community, their beliefs. And I am not a Catholic anymore. I am lapsed. I dont believe in God or any parts of the religion…I am essentially agnostic bordering on atheist. But it doesnt mean that I believe the church has NO place in society. Yes…it very much needs to clean up its act and own up to and not shout down any claims against it…but that is the church as an International Administrative organisation…that is the hierarchy…that is the Vatican and the College of Cardinals, the Holy See and the Bishops…that isnt the people sitting in the pews on a Sunday morning, or volunteering for the many religious charities and societies like St. Vincent De Paul. I understand that many people are angry, that many people are frustrated but honestly, taking this anger out on people who just want to believe in something and be a part of something in their local community is just wrong. There are many levels and many ranges which the word Catholic applies, and not all of them are bad, or secretive, or corrupt in any way…and they do not deserve your anger. In many ways, many parts which form part of the Catholic brand, and many people working within it are only there to try to do something good. Tarring the whole thing, and anyone who is even slightly associated with it, all for the misdeeds and wrongdoings of only a part of it….thats just wrong. Its very ill informed. Its actually ignorant and fueled by bitterness. So…by all means lay whatever charges you like at the door of the hierarchy…they maybe deserve it. The average Catholic on the street who just wants to be left alone to believe what they want and practice that belief as part of a community should be left alone…they bear no responsibility for the evils which are not perpetrated by them. And if it is identity politics that you want to play…then nobody should be free of persecution. If every member of a group should be judged on the misdeeds, wrongdoings and evils of one or a small minority within it….then we are all guilty by your reckoning of something…and we all should be ashamed…and you cant get any more Catholic than that…now can you??? But if you believe that you hold no shame for the misdeeds of any other…then you have to apply those same criteria to everyone else.
@Karen Wellington: well maybe…but then is anyone who has ever given a piece of clothing to St. Vincent De Paul not doing the same thing??? They are contributing to something which is at its very core Catholic. Or should we only promote and give to those Catholic entities which are not linked with paying the wages of priests??? Im not condoning any part of the ugly past and present of the Catholic church…but at the end of the day the parish priest is a good person in most places. I know personally very well that this is the case…from actual personal experience with a family member who the parish priest had been there for in lots of ways through a very hard time…and I will always be grateful to that man for his kindness and his comforting a family member even though I rarely go to a church, and only then for weddings and funerals…and I dont support them financially. But without that man, that priest that service, that relationship which my family member benefited from is gone. So why shouldnt the Catholic Community sponsor a priest willingly…the priest in their parish who in return ministers to them willingly…is that not a contract with the priest and not with the Vatican??? Those people who sponsor him a living are not enabling a paedophile or protecting one…they are giving to a covenant which they do so willingly for their community…nothing else in most other ways.
How would you have a priest survive Karen??? By begging for alms???
@Dell: God bless the child that suffers from the hand of any man, woman or another child.
@Gillian Scully: i agree with your sentiment Gillian. I don’t believe in a god so I believe it is up to us to make sure they are listened to and treated with compassion, love and not accused of slander.
@Mr. Fantastic: moronic comment. You can’t see beyond the dichotomy as usual, cling to the whole ‘well look at them not us’ ignorant nonsense.
@ChuckE:
Yes that makes them just as bad, that’s why true Christians need to stand up to these false Christians and report any evidence of abuse to the authorities. IMO Pedos, Sadists and degenerates joined the church because they seen it as an easy way to get to children, not because the followed the ways of Christianity and Jesus Christ.
@Dermot Lane:
No, not all Catholics are part of the problem and complicit, these filthy Pedos and Sadists are there to undermine the church, they are not Christians… Search “Bella Dodd” & “Manning Johnson”.
@Karen Wellington: then u Karen, as a taxpayer, are culpable for all the ills in our society such as awful healthcare, unequal pay, injustices against travellers and refugees .. or perhaps a better and more reasoned approach is to remain as part of that society and the political process and work to eliminate the ills of our society. Much like many good Catholics try to do within the church.
@Eleanor of Aquitaine: sorry but there’s no other word. All Christians condone violence. The pope is their boss so either agree with him or you are not on his side. Remember he has a direct line to the Christian made up god
Ah yes, God love the ‘progressive’ ‘reformer’ Pope Francis.
@Malachi: dont forget our very own cardinal s*um bag sean brady who covered his paedo mates the same way and who is currently in hiding in rural Ireland waiting for the day he faces the eternal flames of hell for the crimes of his rotten soul
@Malachi: convict people of allegations without supporting evidence is regressive.
@jon-boy55: you’re dead right Jon, they should take a leaf out of Australia s book and lock him up.
@William Bright: But Pope Francis was lenient on convicted abusers, too, reducing their punishments.
What exactly is his policy? Lenient on child rapist priests and tough on their victims?
@Malachi: if I knew who my bishop is I would as him to rescind yer man’s invitation to Ireland.
This is person thats coming to ireland soon and thousands of people will line the streets to welcome and applaud him, turn him back at the airport i say and good riddance.
@john Appleseed: I hope there is a protest. I’ll be there. Anyone know if there’s one planned?
@Dermot Lane: Don’t they say: happy are those that have not seen & yet still believe.
Wow what a major step backward.
@Jane: they never really took a step forward though, did they? This idea that Francis is somehow different to his predecessors is all PR and spin.
@Jane: Deny till they die and victim blaming are the standard tools of the pope and catholic church. I’m surprised that anyone is surprised by this..
@Dermot Lane: I thought he had a bit more to him. I was wrong.
@Jane: I did hope so myself for a while
@Paul J. Redmond: the church is playing the long game.
They know that as an organisation they’ll outlive all the abuse victims. All they have to do is last a few more decades and the vast majority of victims will be dead.
@Barry Somers: that’s assuming they are not creating more victims as we speak. I think that’s a big assumption.
@Jane: oh they are, we’ve heard very little about African country’s so far and parts of Asia. There will be more victims
@Jane: Religious orgs are inherently backward Jane.They are legacy control structures borne out of pre-science attempts at rationalizing our environment.
Meet the new Pope same as the old Pope
@Grumpyoldtroll: defending the indefensible is shameful
He may live to regret his archaic calumny claim
@Quentin Moriarty: wow lol
@Chris Finn: victims exclaimed the same no doubt without the lol
There we have it people, the real image of what the catholic church from the very top thinks of abuse victims still.
They think they are liars, just like the called the former mayor of clonmel back in the 1990s when they sent Vatican representatives to interview him and other victims in dublin. After that interview he tried to kill himself on the way back from Dublin.
This might be easy read this info, but it’s so much harder watch him discribe what happened to him
Is there an organised campaign out there against his visit?
@Ian Phillip CreanerIt would be interesting to see how many would actually object to this visit, a great way of gauging how the tides have turned!….
@Ian Phillip Creaner: hopefully, I’ll be there.
@Kate Flaherty: I agree
@Ian Phillip Creaner: I’ll be a good year in the egg selling business…
@john Appleseed: I wonder would the gardai allow a peaceful protest.
@Martin Ryan: if you notify the right people and tick all the bureaucratic boxes they cant stop you…
@Ian Phillip Creaner: there should be how much will it cost to host his visit…modern forward thonking gov my a***
@jp tobin: 20 million roughly
The mask slipped a little did it!
@flabar oflabar: He had a part to play in the argentine ‘dity war’ of the 70′s. which is kept very quiet.
This is who hundreds of thousands of people are welcoming this summer. Anyone who thinks he is a progressive pope has been conned.
@Steve Austin: In fairness these are the same people who think that the rest of the core Catholic beliefs are plausible…
Lol. And people think this guy is different
We surely don’t want this degenerate to visit Ireland.
https://www.ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/francis-argentina-abuse-record-questioned
The group BishopAccountability.org published the first comprehensive analysis of Francis’ abuse track record while he was an Archbishop. The documents span the 15 years (1998-2013) he served as the head of the Buenos Aires church and includes information on 42 accused Argentine clerics.
Pope Francis said:
“The Catholic church is maybe the only public institution to have moved with transparency and responsibility,” he said. “No one else has done more. Yet the church is the only one to be attacked.”
BishopAccountability.org said on its website:
“[Bergoglio] released no documents, no names of accused priests, no tallies of accused priests, no policy for handling abuse, not even an apology to victims,”
@Max Krzyzanowski: clearly the church’s idea of transparency is a little muddier than the average person’s thoughts on it..
@Max Krzyzanowski: I dont think transparency means what he thinks it means……..
Bros before hos.
The mask slips
This is outrageous. As I am the only Irish male Survivor Campaigner seeking ‘Rescue Services’ and ‘Safe Space Provisioning’ for survivors of clerical child sexual abuse who has met with Pope Francis, this news of Pope Francis accusing Chilean survivor and friend, Juan Carlos Cruz and others of slander, is deeply disturbing and that’s an understatement. This issue of the appointment of Juan Barros to Bishop of Osorno in 2015 (http://bit.ly/2Bfo1JU) lead the Papal Commission for the Protection of Minors to dismiss (placed on permanent leave) Peter Saunders, also a friend, from the PCPM (http://bit.ly/2DezNdx) in February 2016. He resigned under protest in December 2017. What is equally disturbing is that despite my tireless work for survivors of clerical child sexual abuse, the Irish media have not and do not consult or appear to permit any comment on clerical child sexual abuse survivor concerns and interests expressed by me. I was in recent contact with Juan Carlos Cruz encouraging him and others in Chile, reminding them that they are most certainly not alone in this world. We are acutely aware that Pope Francis is coming to Ireland later this year after the referendum on abortion has been held. His remarks in Chile have a very chilling effect on survivors here regarding the attitude of the Catholic Church towards victims of Catholic Church abuse. I only hope the media here will allow more survivor campaigner comment on these shocking developments. This is a dark day for the Catholic Church and what lies behind the apparent ‘tears’ and ‘compassion’ and ‘apologies’ expressed for the suffering of survivors of clerical child sexual abuse and their families. We ought to remember that Pope Francis chose Dublin this year for the World Meeting of Families. This is not looking good where the affront to the family by the Catholic Church, not only the Spiritual Family of God according to Catholic teaching and belief, but also the affront to the whole human family involved in the global scale of clerical child sexual abuse where not one country on the planet appears to have escaped sexual abuse by ministers of the Catholic Church. My solidarity is with Juan Carlos Cruz, Juan Carlos Claret and the good people of Osorno and Chile who will be deeply hurt by these unveiled words of condemnation of survivors of clerical child sexual abuse. We survivors stand together in this and send our love and commitment to all those in Chile facing the distress of these unguarded and ill-advised and deeply injurious papal comments. The papal visit to Chile could not have ended worse considering how damagingly hostile was its beginning – http://bit.ly/2Bf3hCl. I wrote about the papal audience granted an unknown number of Chilean survivors of clerical child sexual abuse in secret and expressed my deepest reservations about it – http://bit.ly/2mFZ7y3 – but now I am all the more convinced it was and is disingenuous. As one journalist has put it to me: “One major reason [for private papal audiences with survivors] has often been labeling the media as a band of wolves ready to pry and cause further harm to people already harmed enough, so I think many in the media agree about “there is something rotten in the State of Denmark” and that this argument deserves deeper scrutiny.”
@Marc OhEalaighthe: El Papa, cried the Tears of a Crocodile.!!
The Ionabots are fierce quiet today. They must be off brainstorming their response. We should follow the methods they used in the SSMref and are using now in REPEAL. Let see….. How do they do it: ” Well I was a fervent Catholic, three masses of a Sunday and Novenas as an extra treat, but now…. “
@Ian Phillip Creaner: they don’t care about the popes visit, they are more concerned with spending their time and money on the ref
I never understood why people are so keen on this guy. He’s the product of the same corrupt spider empire as the last one.
But that said. Maybe he has a point. #metoo article and you can’t scroll without someone shouting innocent until proven guilty. Do priests not get the same treatment? Why not? I’ve no idea whether Barros knew about the abuse or not, but there’s no evidence in the article.
@Ben McArthur: he has no evidence to say its slander.
@Dell: you need evidence to convict or accuse, you do not require evidence to rebuke slander. Basic law..
@Paul Whitehead: he is doing what the church always does, attack victims or people who are showing them up
Tom Burke -where art thou.
@Havana na na na: That is what I was asking. He never responds if it is something that truly casts the pope and the Church in a bad light. If he could deny this story he would.
@Havana na na na: Oh Tom will give his usual response.. Everyone else is doing it so why can’t we.
@Havana na na na: He’s going through the scores of abortion porn pics he has to pick out a few to send to Meehole along with his letter, angrily written in green biro, of course.
Well, he’s now demonstrated what he said in an interview last year. That he’s fallible and that he’s a sinner. It’s sure going to be an interesting visit to Ireland.
These trips are nothing more than damage limitation exercises, no disrespect intended to anyone who practices.
@Kate Flaherty: I wonder is the 20 million Euros of Tax payers money that is going to Pay for this Apologetic leader of Pedophiles, going to have a ‘Limit’.!!
Isn’t this how things work though – Innocent until Proven Guilty and all?
If I’m reading this all-over-the-place article correctly – Pope is pointing out the fact one is guilty – but holding off accusing the second of a cover-up until some evidence is demonstrated?
@Anthony Clark: the word he used means slander..it is one thing to say you want proof, it’s another to say it’s slander.
@Anthony Clark: I thought the same. Headline and sub headline is misleading from the actual article
@Anthony Clark: what evidence does he have that the victims are lying
Sentenced to “A lifetime of prayer and penance” says it all really .
@Michael Carton: Can imagine he laughing; ‘I’ll pray for you ‘Packie’.!!
@Mairtín: should have been: ‘Pappy’.!!
Langer
But..but he’s the cool pope!
@mike scott: Tool pope more like, odious little twerp!
What an idiot. So much for him being a healing figure for the disgraced Catholic Church who covers for paedophiles, degenerates, abusers and slavery in Ireland and all the other countries they infest.
Ffs….(eyes to heaven)
Crap. I wanted to like this guy so much and he was making it so easy to.
@OU812: you mean his pr team were making him easy to like…….
@OU812: I’m surprised he kept up the facade as long as he did.
This Pope is a joke .
Ah…the Catholic Church…the gift that keeps on giving!
have your say