AMBULANCE staff say they have been barred from speaking out about the decline of the service, and were gagged during the trial of two paramedics over the death of a patient, the JEP can reveal.
In an email obtained by this newspaper, chief ambulance officer Peter Gavey told employees that they were “bound by contractual obligations concerning the maintenance of confidentiality” not to speak to the press about the case involving Tom Le Sauteur and John Sutherland.
Mr Le Sauteur (36) and Mr Sutherland (61) were convicted of breaching health and safety laws and sentenced to two years of conditional discharges following a Jurat trial in June. Both men have vowed to appeal their convictions, which angered medical staff throughout the Island.
In the email, dated 25 June, Mr Gavey said that all staff were barred from speaking to the media without submitting a written request to Justice and Home Affairs chief officer Kate Briden.
Freedom of expression in the workplace is guaranteed under article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which says: “Everyone has the right to freedom of expression [including] to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority.”
Sources told the JEP that it is not the first time ambulance staff have been threatened by management against speaking to the press. One told the JEP about a case where following an article that mentioned an anonymous ambulance staff employee, all members of staff were threatened with “severe disciplinary action” if they spoke to the media.
The source also recalled other cases where employees have been threatened with disciplinary action for speaking to the media about rising violence against ambulance staff.
“The claim that it is a contractual obligation has been used over the last five years to prevent us from talking to the press about the decline in the service,” the source said.
“Whatever the original purpose of the contractual obligation, it has been twisted and misused.”
Another source told this newspaper: “With regards to the ‘gagging’ of staff they do this often on sensitive cases and especially through this entire court case with threats of disciplinary action if it was spoken of or questioned.”
Justice and Home Affairs told the JEP on 16 July that the two paramedics, Mr Le Sauteur and Mr Sutherland, had not been blocked from making public comment following their conviction.
“However, I have advised that I am unable to permit them to speak on subjects which might prejudice any proceedings, inquest or process.
“As members of the public service, they must also not breach their contractual obligations,” Ms Briden said.
The JEP asked for clarification about what contractual obligations specifically forbid staff to speak to the press.
In a statement issued on Friday, Ms Briden said: “The two men were never barred from talking to the media. They were advised that they could make public comment if they wished, but were also advised that they were not permitted to discuss anything that might prejudice any proceedings, inquest or process, or be in breach of their contractual obligations as an employee.
“Government contracts do not forbid employees from speaking to the media. They require employees to adhere to confidentiality and privacy-of-business regulations, in line with standard practice.
“They also require employees to seek approval from their chief officer before speaking to the media. Internal emails have been sent to staff reminding them of these obligations.”
The JEP also asked for clarity from the department regarding prejudice, as typically it is only trials by jury that can be prejudiced, not trials by judges or Jurats, or inquests, which are carried out by a coroner.
An ambulance service contract viewed by the JEP only includes two references to confidentiality, neither of which applies to the media, applying instead to confidential business information and data protection.
Unite, the ambulance workers union, has called for a judicial review into the convictions.
