Tynwald Standards and Members' Interests Committee
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
S T A N D I N G C O M M I T T E E O F T Y N W A L D C O U R T O F F I C I A L R E P O R T R E C O R T Y S O I K O I L B I N G V E A Y N T I N V A A L P R O C E E D I N G S D A A L T Y N TYNWALD STANDARDS AND MEMBERS’ INTERESTS COMMITTEE HANSARD Douglas, Friday, 22nd November 2013 PP183/13 TSMI-H, No. 2 All published Official Reports can be found on the Tynwald website www.tynwald.org.im/Official Papers/Hansards/Please select a year: Published by the Office of the Clerk of Tynwald, Legislative Buildings, Finch Road, Douglas, Isle of Man, IM1 3PW. © High Court of Tynwald, 2013 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 22nd NOVEMBER 2013 Members Present: Chairman: Hon. S C Rodan SHK Mr R H Quayle MHK Mr T P Wild MLC Mr D C Cretney MHK Mr T M Crookall MHK Clerk: Mr R I S Phillips Contents Procedural................................................................................................................................. 23 EVIDENCE OF Mr David Killip, Chief Executive, Department of Health; Mrs Lesley Keenan, Deputy Chief Executive, Department of Health; Mrs Barbara Scott, Hospital Manager; Mr Norman McGregor Edwards, Director of Healthcare Delivery; and Mr Jonathan Davies, Business and Public Relations Executive. .................................................................................................. 23 The Committee adjourned at 12.18 p.m. .................................................................................... 49 __________________________________________________________________ 22 TSMI STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 22nd NOVEMBER 2013 Tynwald Standards and Members’ Interests Committee The Committee sat in private at 10.34 a.m. in the Legislative Council Chamber, Legislative Buildings, Douglas [MR SPEAKER in the Chair] Procedural The Chairman (Mr Speaker): Good morning, and I welcome you all. Thank you very much for coming to meet with us. We are the Tynwald Standards and Members’ Interests Committee and 5 we are taking evidence this morning on matters relating to the conduct of Minister Anderson. If I could begin by introducing the members of the Committee to you: Mr Howard Quayle MHK; Tony Wild MLC; Hon. Tim Crookall MHK; David Cretney MHK; and our Clerk, Roger Phillips. Could I just ask that we all make sure our mobile phones are turned off please. We are meeting in private sessions. There are no press or members of the public present, but we are 10 recording for Hansard record purposes, and in that regard, it is important that we do not talk over each other because it will interfere with the recording. EVIDENCE OF Mr David Killip, Chief Executive, Department of Health; Mrs Lesley Keenan, Deputy Chief Executive, Department of Health; Mrs Barbara Scott, Hospital Manager; Mr Norman McGregor Edwards, Director of Healthcare Delivery; and Mr Jonathan Davies, Business and Public Relations Executive. Q71. The Chairman: Mr Killip, can I ask you to introduce yourself and the members of the Department who have come with you? 15 Mr Killip: Yes, of course, Mr Speaker. Ladies first: second to my right, Mrs Barbara Scott, Manager of Noble’s Hospital; immediately to my right, Mrs Lesley Keenan, the Department's Deputy Chief Executive; furthest to my right, Mr Norman McGregor Edwards, Director of Healthcare Delivery; to my immediate left, Mr Davies, Business and PR Executive, Department of Health; and I am David Killip, the Chief 20 Executive. Q72. The Chairman: Thank you very much. Could I just clarify why you have brought Mr Davies? 25 Mr Killip: Yes, in an exchange of e-mails with Mr Phillips, he invited me to make available to the Committee anybody who had had an involvement in this matter. Mr Davies has prepared __________________________________________________________________ 23 TSMI STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 22nd NOVEMBER 2013 documents and has been party to some of these matters and I thought it might be helpful if he was present. 30 Q73. The Chairman: Thank you, okay. We will proceed then, thank you very much. Can I begin by asking, was Minister Anderson's statement on 11th June, which was an answer he gave to Mrs Beecroft in the House of Keys – that statement, as qualified by the later Statement he made in Tynwald on 25th June, which was a Personal Statement – were those statements, made publicly, correct? 35 Mr Killip: Would you give me a moment while I turn to the Hansards, Mr Speaker? In my own view, they were correct. The Minister received a Question from Mrs Beecroft in the House of Keys on 11th June and provided her with an Answer. Then she put a supplementary question to him – a supplementary question, incidentally, which suggests that she was slightly 40 confused by one matter, because her supplementary question includes a reference on her part to ‘a letter signed by eight consultants’, whereas if we look at the Minister’s Answer appearing immediately above in Hansard, it is clear that he refers to a letter signed by a consultant, not by eight consultants. But, be that as it may, Mrs Beecroft puts a supplementary question to the Minister, which he 45 then answers. Within his answer, he says: ‘As the Hon. Member is aware…’ Now, if we pause for a moment and ask ourselves, why would the Hon. Member be aware? 50 Clearly, you may wish to ask the Minister why he used those words, but it would be my belief that he used those words because prior to this sitting of the House of Keys, there had been a press report on this matter, which I think refers to this. So that is, I think, why the Minister chose to use those words, though I would stress that is my analysis and conclusion. I do not know it to be a fact. 55 ‘As the Hon. Member is aware, some of those consultants subsequently withdrew their support for that letter because they believed it had overstepped the mark and there were other processes which they could have gone down in place to relay their concerns to management’ 60 – I believe he means hospital management – ‘about clinical areas of concern.’ Now, I have no doubt whatsoever that when the Minister said that, he believed it to be 65 correct, and I believe it to be correct, because as you will perhaps hear from others who were involved in conversations with hospital consultants, some of them, I believe, did accept that having used a letter as the medium to convey concerns that they had, they subsequently acknowledged that they could have gone about that in a different way, specifically by using reporting procedures within the Hospital to bring their concerns to the attention of the Medical 70 Director, which is what the letter being referred to did. The very reason that we are here today, as I understand it, is because the Minister invited you gentlemen to consider his conduct, because he was challenged as to his remarks by Mr Mike Divers, a consultant gynaecologist at Noble’s Hospital. I have had an opportunity lately to read documents sent to the Minister by Mr Divers, not all of which I think I have seen previously, and 75 it would appear that Mr Divers is suggesting that the Minister's remarks in Keys… Incidentally, throughout some documents that I have seen, there are references to the Minister having possibly misled Tynwald. Indeed, when challenging the Minister's remarks he made on 11th June, Mr Divers refers to those remarks as having been made in Tynwald. They were not. They were made in the House of Keys. I cannot see remarks made in Tynwald about 80 this matter, but there may be some. __________________________________________________________________ 24 TSMI STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 22nd NOVEMBER 2013 But Mr Divers’ challenges to the Minister appear to be predicated on a belief by Mr Divers that the Minister was suggesting that hospital consultants should not raise concerns about patient safety and that to do so was in some way wrong. I do not believe the Minister ever said that. Indeed, in subsequent observations made by the Minister, he himself says, ‘I didn't say 85 that.’ It seems to me that what the Minister is saying in this supplementary answer is that some consultants believed that the letter – not the substance… not concern about patient safety – that the letter was not the ideal vehicle or the only vehicle with which they could have raised those concerns. 90 Now, I interpret these words as saying that it would appear perhaps that Mr Divers does not; and I think the Minister endeavoured, subsequent to Mr Divers’ challenges, to set out on record what he had meant. So I believe that the Minister's comments are truthful and accurate, and I believe that the Minister intended them to be truthful and accurate. 95 Q74. The Chairman: So when the Minister says: ‘some of the consultants subsequently withdrew their support from that letter because they believed it had overstepped the mark and there were other processes which they could have gone down in place to relay their 100 concerns to management’, you are saying that the Minister was correct to say that and you agree with that statement, that there were other processes, alternative processes, that the consultants could have gone down, rather than write that letter? (Mr Killip: Yes.) Is that your position? 105 Mr Killip: It is. There are processes within the Hospital for escalating concerns about the delivery of clinical services, and those processes could have been followed. It is certainly true that subsequently, some consultants said, ‘We regret now that we signed the letter, that we pursued this route, because matters could have been handled differently.’ 110 So the Minister, I believe is making the point about the use of the letter, not about the content – Q75.