Health report withheld ‘over reporting concerns’

St Helier Views General Hospital Picture: DAVID FERGUSON

Senator John Le Fondré said that, ‘as a principle’, the report should be released into the public domain, but admitted that some issues surrounding commercial confidentiality, privacy or information around individuals could prevent certain elements from being publicised.

Health reports of this nature are typically available in other jurisdictions. However, during a recent Scrutiny hearing, two senior civil servants in the Health Department said the review could be ‘sensationalised’ and that they were reluctant to release the review for that reason.

The government’s commitment to transparency has been questioned recently by St John Constable Andy Jehan, who spoke out about the failure to release minutes from the Scientific and Technical Advisory Cell in a timely manner.

Health director general Caroline Landon told a Public Accounts Committee hearing this week that the full performance report was ‘us naked’.

She said the department had held conversations regarding the report ‘because, in other jurisdictions, that report is public’ and the ‘whole aspiration of our governance structure is that we are transparent’.

Ms Landon added: ‘I think some of the challenges for us in Jersey come from us being a very different jurisdiction, and the information can be used in ways that inhibit patients from accessing care, because it can be presented in a way that is sensationalised, and that is difficult.’

The director general added that not releasing the report was ‘not us trying to hide our performance’, but instead ‘trying to support our staff to deliver better for patients’, adding: ‘Sometimes in Jersey that is difficult because it’s sensationalised.’

Meanwhile, group managing director for health Rob Sainsbury said it would be ‘really challenging in Jersey because there is a real sensitivity, because it’s small’. He said that mental-health-unit admissions and suicides were ‘reported in a very sensational way in the media here’.

He added: ‘The way that they are interpreted can really impact on people in terms of how you want to promote your services so if you hear about a negative impact continuously for your service, and that stops someone seeking help and support, that can be really counter-productive.’

Mr Sainsbury said: ‘In terms of putting everything out there, it feels that the information isn’t always appropriately and proportionately interpreted. It becomes a front headline that you would just not see in other jurisdictions.’

Senator Le Fondré said he wanted to ‘get to the bottom’ of the situation and wanted to fully understand the reasons that staff did not want to release the performance report.

He said: ‘I need to go back and find out the full details because I have been dealing in the last few days with the Competent Authorities Ministers so I would have to go back and find out what the issue is.

‘I know that sometimes Health get very cautious around privacy issues and so I would need to have a look at the report. My view, as a principle, is that if a report has been produced, it would go out into the public domain but sometimes there are issues around commercial confidentiality, or it could be around individuals – or individual employees – or it can be around privacy issues, so let me go back and get to the bottom of it.’

When asked by the JEP whether the report would be released if there were no privacy issues, and the concerns related to health officials not wanting to release a potentially unflattering report, Senator Le Fondré added: ‘Let me get to the bottom of it before I make any commitments because I would like to understand, if there is a reticence, what that reticence is.’

– Advertisement –
– Advertisement –