Despite what several persons have stated to the contrary in media interviews today ,23/02/2012,  the International Review in July 2011 was not a review of the choice of the Mater site.

See the following excerpt from the Frequently asked Questions (FAQs) currently posted on  The Department of Health website ‘publications’ 2011 section.

“Report of the Independent Review of National Children’s Hospital project
FAQs…

2. How/why were the notional sites selected?
It is important to remember that this Review was not a site selection process. The
three notional sites were selected to address issues that had been raised regarding
possible savings from building on a greenfield site and concerns around access and
proposals for options to build on a site on or near the M50.”

Furthermore, our organisation would wish to point out that the international experts (part 2 of the report) did not address the remit  of theTerms of Reference .  No ‘potential clinical benefits’ of the Mater site are identified by them in the report.

The Terms of Reference (for part 2 of the report) were as follows

“To examine whether the potential clinical benefits, if any, of locating a Children’s hospital beside the Adult hospital on the Mater site outweigh:
I. Any cost differential; and
II. Any design issues, including access to the hospital”.