Author Archives: sharmilachowdhury
Statement – Barts and Charlotte Monroe
31 March 2015 A joint statement
Barts Health NHS Trust is pleased to confirm that it has invited Charlotte Monro to return to employment at Whipps Cross Hospital and that Charlotte has accepted the Trust’s invitation.
Charlotte will be returning in the very near future, working three days a week as a moving and handling co-ordinator, following a period of re-training.
The Trust and Charlotte have also reached confidential terms of agreement in respect of her Employment Tribunal claim. The Trust has valued the discussion of issues during the Employment Tribunal process. Charlotte deeply appreciates the thorough exploration of the issues in an objective light that the Tribunal has enabled. The Trust confirms that, as part of Charlotte’s return, it will for all purposes in the future, be removing reference from Charlotte’s employment record with the Trust, the disciplinary matters which were the subject of an internal process against Charlotte and which were then reviewed by the Employment Tribunal. This will allow Charlotte and the Trust to move forward fully, from what we acknowledge has been a difficult process for all concerned, above all for Charlotte herself.
Following the recent publication of the Care Quality Commission inspection report into Whipps Cross Hospital, an Improvement Board has been put in place to address all the concerns raised by the CQC. Charlotte Monro is an energetic and committed campaigner on patient care issues in the NHS, and the Trust welcomes the contribution which Charlotte will undoubtedly be able to make to the discussion about ensuring Whipps Cross’s future. Members of the Trust’s Executive will be meeting with Charlotte, Unison Regional Officer Derek Helyar, Chair of Staff Side at Whipps Cross, Valerie Phillips and Chair of the Staff Partnership Forum, Mireille Braid, in the near future, for an open and frank discussion about lessons to be learnt and Charlotte’s future contribution.
The Trust values Charlotte’s long professional contribution over many years to standards of patient care and to patient and staff safety.
Barts Health NHS Trust Charlotte Monro
Bristol MP ‘determined upholder of NHS values of care free at the point of delivery’ – clinicians
| Posted: March 23, 2015
Charlotte Leslie with her NHS surgeon father Ian
The letter says: “We write as a group of NHS campaigners for transparency, most of us whistleblowers, who have seen the worst of the NHS.
“Whistleblowers have suffered for the sake of protecting the interests of patients.
“Many of us have been through years of painful turmoil as a result of speaking up.
” In such a journey, there are often few dependable friends.One of the few exceptions to this has been Charlotte Leslie MP, a woman of great decency, capability and refreshing honesty. NHS whistleblowers and cam-paigners are much indebted to her for all the support and advocacy that she has provided over the years.
“Without such stalwart help, the plight of NHS whistleblowers would not be as well known or understood. Ms Leslie’s abundant common sense and sense of fair play is very precious in public life, and shines through in her work on the Health Select Committee.
“Her support of the NHS is clear.”We know she is a determined upholder of the NHS values of care free at the point of delivery and need – not only for now, but for generations to come – and that she works hard for an NHS in which the interests of patients must be paramount.
“Bristol is very lucky to have such a committed public servant.”
Ms Leslie said: “I am humbled to have received this letter of support. As a politician, I have pas-sionately tried to ensure that we make the right decisions which will preserve a safe and free NHS for generations to come.
“Sadly, some opponents have decided to use the NHS for short term political gain when what we need is a mature debate to explore how this magnificent institution can flourish in the future.
“At a time when I have been so misrepresented and attacked for trying to do the right thing for the NHS, it is heartening to hear that those at the sharp end in the health profession – some of whom have sacrificed their careers to preserve a quality NHS – have come out as a strong voice to say that our NHS is too important to become party political football.”
The signatories to the letter are:
Sir Brian Jarman, Emeritus Professor Imperial College Faculty of Medicine
Professor Steve Bolsin Consultant Anaesthetist and whistleblower
Gary Walker Former NHS CEO and whistleblower
Professor Narinder Kapur Consultant Neuropsychologist and whistleblower
Sharmila Chowdhury Former NHS Imaging Services Manager and whistleblower
Dr Kevin Beatt Former NHS Consultant Cardiologist and whistleblower
Lady Maha Yassaie Former NHS Chief Pharmacist for West Berkshire and whistle-blower
Dr David Drew Former NHS Consultant Paediatrician and whistleblower
Fiona Bell NHS whistleblower and complainant
Dr Minh Alexander Former NHS Consultant Psychiatrist and whistleblower
Labour to create NHS staff champions to protect stressed-out nurses and give an ear to whistleblowers
A new independent body to help NHS workers deal with stress and ensure patient safety is on the cards. Shadow Health Secretary Andy Burnham reveals all to Sunday People political editor Nigel Nelson

Labour is to create a new independent NHS body to protect health workers if it wins the General Election.
They will be known as NHS staff champions and be the first port of call for whistleblowers who believe patient safety is at risk.
They will also deal with allegations of bullying or intimidation by hospital managers and senior doctors.
The move by shadow Health Secretary Andy Burnham comes as new figures show nurses are now under so much pressure two in five are suffering stress.
The NHS staff survey revealed that 41% of hospital nurses and midwives are overwhelmed by their workload – a 27% increase since 2010.
And half said the ward they work on is now dangerously understaffed.

NHS champions will help to cut work-related stress and absence through sickness.
They will also tackle aggressive behaviour by the public which affects a third of NHS workers.
And police will get powers to issue on-the-spot fines for physical or verbal abuse of NHS staff by patients or their relatives.
Mr Burnham told the Sunday People in an exclusive interview: “We don’t care enough for the people who care for us.
“I’m going to have a big job rebuilding the morale of a shattered workforce. They’ve been ground down over the last five years.”

He will recruit 20,000 more nurses to ease the pressure paid for by a Mansion Tax on homes worth more than £2million.
Although the champions will work within the NHS they will have the same independence as the Chief Medical Officer does now.
One in seven medical staff report they have been victims of violence in the previous 12 months.
The NHS loses £1.6billion a year through sickness and it costs even more to pay agency workers up to £1,000 a weekend to replace them.
Mr Burnham added: “Hospital workers say they feel like they’re in a tunnel with no light at the end.
“They feel under the cosh, demoralised and exhausted. My first priority will be to give them a lift.”
Eight in ten NHS staff believe their own wellbeing is key to patient care. Yet they feel neglected by Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt.

And hospitals with high rates of patient deaths also record more sickness absence.
Labour will also hire 8,000 more GPs to ease pressure on local surgeries.
Six in ten family doctors say it is now so bad they are thinking of taking early retirement.
NHS ‘whistleblower’ demands apology and comparable job

A former NHS boss who says he was sacked for raising patient safety concerns has asked the health secretary for an apology and a “comparable” job.
In a letter to Jeremy Hunt, ex-United Lincolnshire Hospitals Trust boss Gary Walker argues he is a whistleblower whose actions have been vindicated.
But he says he has been blacklisted from working for the health service.
The Department of Health in England says it will be looking carefully at the issues raised in the letter.
“Start Quote
I continue to be blacklisted by the NHS despite a high achieving career prior to raising concerns about patient safety”
Gary WalkerLetter to Health Secretary
Gary Walker’s letter says that, as chief executive of United Lincolnshire Hospitals Trust, he warned senior health officials that patients would come to harm if it was forced to comply with NHS targets.
The letter sets out, point-by-point, why he believes he is a whistleblower, and how – in his view – this led to his dismissal and being blacklisted by the NHS.
He goes on to argue that his actions were vindicated by events, as evidence grew of rising death rates and a high number of safety incidents, but says he was “gagged” by a compromise agreement, which he broke two years ago.
Mr Walker cites recent reports that looked into whistleblowing from the health select committee of MPs and Sir Robert Francis QC as supporting his call for an apology and “practical redress”.
He writes: “The practical redress you offer will need to be individual to those who raised concerns and the harm they suffered but I would expect that whistle-blowers simply want an apology and a job that is comparable to the one they were forced from.”
‘High-achiever’
The letter is copied to the chief executive of NHS England, Simon Stevens, and shadow health secretary Andy Burnham.
It also includes a full CV which, he says represents a “highly successful career” which was ended as a result of raising concerns about patient safety and misconduct.
He says: “I continue to be blacklisted by the NHS despite a high-achieving career prior to raising concerns about patient safety.”
In response to the letter, a department of health spokesperson, said: “We want to make the NHS the safest health system in the world and creating an open and honest culture where patients and staff are listened to is vital to improving care.
“This government has made important changes to protect whistle-blowers by outlawing gagging clauses in contracts and introducing new laws in this parliament to protect those who speak up.”
The department says every NHS manager and leader is to have training on how to raise concerns.
Liverpool NHS boss who presided over ‘bullying’ and ‘blame’ culture lands new job
Liverpool Echo 6 March 201 By Joshua Taylor
Bernie Cuthel begins five-month secondment to health board in Wales

An NHS boss who resigned after a culture of “bullying” and “blame” was exposed at a Liverpool health trust has landed a new senior job in north Wales.
Bernie Cuthel stepped down as chief executive of Liverpool Community Health NHS Trust after it was slammed by regulators last year.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) issued the organisation with two warnings in January 2014 for failing to meet national welfare targets – and revealed staff on a trust-run ward at Fazakerley hospital had raised concerns over “bullying” managers and a “blame culture” that made them afraid to report incidents.
Since stepping down last April, Ms Cuthel got a new job at Manchester Mental Health and Social Care NHS Trust – and this week began a five-month secondment to the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board (BCUHB) in Bangor.
She will work as the board’s interim director of primary, community and mental health services.
West Lancashire MP Rosie Cooper, who previously asked questions in Parliament about Ms Cuthel’s time in Liverpool, slammed the BCUHB’s decision to hire her.
The Labour politician said: “There’s a serious gap in accountability when senior executives and boards preside over a culture of bullying and intimidation.
“In the light of my investigations into the Liverpool Community Health NHS Trust, I have referred Bernie Cuthel to the CQC to ask them whether she is a fit and proper person to be involved in another NHS organisation.
“We are nowhere near the end of the investigations and litigation which will come out of the Liverpool Community Health NHS Trust.”
The CQC’s inquiry last year said staff at the Liverpool trust claimed their managers were “intimidating”, “unresponsive” and “bullying”.
A number of employees said they would not report concerns to the management team for fear of reprisals and recrimination.
Ms Cuthel stepped down in April along with the Liverpool Community Health NHS Trust’s director of nursing and human resources director.
A BCUHB spokesman said: “We advertised a secondment opportunity on the NHS Jobs website.
“Ms Cuthel applied in open competition and was deemed to be the best candidate at interview.
“Pre-employment checks, including taking up two references from her current and former employers, were completed.
“A secondment agreement has been entered into with her current employer for a period of five months.”
The BCUHB added that Ms Cuthel would not make any comment personally.
Tories accused of hiding ‘totally shocking’ report into NHS management
‘Appalling’ treatment of NHS whistleblowers must be investigated: Staff ostracised by hospital bosses demand independent inquiry after ‘whitewash’ Francis report
- Freedom To Speak Up Review published report revealing culture of fear
- Sir Robert Francis sought evidence from hundreds of doctors and nurses
- Concluded whistleblowers ‘bullied and ostracised’ for speaking up
- Scathing letter from three high profile whistleblowers calls for inquiry
- Say their careers have been ruined and still no action has been taken
NHS whistleblowers are demanding an independent inquiry into their treatment by hospital managers after a long-awaited report was declared a ‘whitewash’.
In a scathing letter to the report’s author, they accused him of failing to hold any managers to account and leaving patients at risk of serious harm.
The NHS’s ‘Freedom to Speak up Review’, which was published a fortnight ago, told how whistleblowers have faced a culture of ‘fear, bullying and ostracisation’ for daring to speak out.
But whistleblowers whose careers have been ruined said still no action has been taken to address the concerns about patient safety that they have been making for years.
Despite hearing awful reports about failures and cover ups over patients’ deaths, the report’s author Sir Robert Francis has ‘ignored’ their stories, they said.
Scroll down to read the letter in full


‘We expected that you would have taken action in these matters which involved patient harm, death and fraud,’ the whistleblowers have written to Sir Robert.
‘Those responsible have not been held accountable. Lessons have not been learned. Patients and their relatives have not been told the truth.
‘We consider this failure to address our concerns a serious flaw in your review.’
The letter, which has been signed by three NHS whistleblowers, added: ‘We feel that we have not been taken seriously, which has been our experience as whistleblowers all along.
‘It seems appropriate to us that you allow independent scrutiny of all the submissions so that these matters can be addressed.’
Sir Robert was commissioned last June by the Government to head the review into whistleblowing in the NHS.
He previously led two inquiries into the scandal at Mid Staffordshire hospital, where 1,200 patients died needlessly.
Some 600 NHS staff spoke to the barrister and his team, who were also overwhelmed by 19,800 responses from other employees to an online survey.
Sir Robert reported that whistleblowers are too often derided as ‘snitches, troublemakers and backstabbers’.
He said many had, in effect, been blacklisted by the NHS, facing being ‘victimised’ by managers, forced out of their jobs and unable to find other work.
The barrister made 20 recommendations – including a ‘whistleblowing guardian’ at each hospital – which the Government has promised to enforce in an attempt to change the culture of silence in the health service.

NHS whistleblowers, however, have since confronted him, outlining their ‘serious concerns’ that his report has failed to address any of the specific concerns made by NHS staff about the alarming treatment of patients.
The letter has been signed by three high profile whistleblowers, including Dr David Drew, a top paediatrician who was sacked after claiming he had witnessed a cover up over a child’s death.
It has also been signed by Sharmila Chowdhury, a senior radiography manager who spoke out about a £250,000 fraud at her Trust, and a third colleague who asked not to be named.
Dated February 23, 2015, the letter states: ‘We have now had an opportunity to digest your report and have a number of serious concerns.
‘More than 600 individuals made detailed submissions to the quantitative review.
‘We suppose that many, like us, assumed that you would take these seriously as disclosures made in the public interest and act on them. That is what you told us when we first met you.
‘You have allowed situations where patients are at risk and where managers act defensively out of self-interest to continue unaddressed.
‘Amongst the other 600 plus submissions there must be, and we know there are, more examples of fraud and unresolved patient risk.’
They went on to demand that the submissions are now properly dealt with under ‘independent scrutiny’.
After the report was published, there was particular unease about a key clause which advised whistleblowers not to speak to the press, saying they should only do so as a ‘last resort’ to avoid causing ‘considerable distress’.
Dr Drew told the Mail he was publicising the whistleblowers’ letter to Sir Robert because ‘the press seems to be the only way to squeeze the truth out’.
He added: ‘History will judge Francis badly. He failed whistleblowers and offered a get out of jail free for managers. And that adds up to failing patients. The whole point was patient safety but he ignored all our reports.’
In his review, Sir Robert said: ‘What I heard during the course of the review from staff, employers, regulators and unions and others leaves me in no doubt that there’s a serious problem in the NHS.
‘Too often, honestly-expressed anxieties have met with hostility and breakdown of working relationships. Worse still, some people suffer life-changing events, they lose their jobs, their careers and even their health.
‘We heard all too frequently of jobs being lost, but also of serious psychological damage, even to the extent of suicidal depression.
‘In short, lives can be ruined by poor handling of staff who have raised concerns.’
Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt told the Commons: ‘The only way we will build an NHS with the highest standards is if the doctors and nurses who have given their lives to patient care always feel listened to when they speak out about patient care.
‘The message must go out that we are calling time on bullying, intimidation and victimisation, which have no place in our NHS.
‘We will ensure that every member of staff, NHS manager and NHS leader has proper training on how to raise concerns and how to treat people who raise concerns.’
Last night, Sir Robert Francis said: ‘I was asked by the Secretary of State to review the way concerns are handled and how those who raised them are treated.
‘I was not asked to investigate or pass judgement on the concerns themselves and made it very clear to all concerned that I was not going to do so.
‘It would be inappropriate to comment on individual contributions, as these were shared with me in confidence.’

A Department of Health spokesman added: ‘Since Mid Staffs, there have been significant changes to make the NHS the safest and most transparent healthcare system in the world.
‘We are confident Sir Robert Francis’ recommendations will help create a more open and honest culture, and we want to change the law in this Parliament so staff feel more able to raise concerns — creating Freedom To Speak Up Guardians will also support them to do so.’
Responding the Dr Drew’s comments, a spokesman for the Walsall Healthcare NHS Trust said the issues Dr Drew raises have been addressed through two formal legal processes, ongoing since 2009.
He said: ‘In 2012 the case went to an Employment Tribunal and we are satisfied with the outcome of the case and that of the recent Employment Appeals Tribunal that dismissed Dr Drew’s claims.
‘We would like to reiterate that this case did not question Dr Drew’s skills as a paediatric consultant and on behalf of the Trust would like to say that we regret that the situation had to get to the Tribunal stage.
‘As a Trust we actively encourage and support our staff to raise an issue if they are concerned about patient care.’
Meanwhile, responding to Ms Chowdhury’s concerns, a spokesman for London North West Healthcare NHS Trust – which now includes Ealing Trust – said: ‘The Trust commissioned an independent report which was undertaken by Parkhill counter fraud services.
‘They found no evidence of wrong doing on the part of the two consultants named in the allegations.’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2971737/Appalling-treatment-NHS-whistleblowers-investigated-Staff-ostracised-hospital-bosses-demand-independent-inquiry-whitewash-Francis-Report.html#ixzz3T1kz27zs
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Liverpool Women’s Hospital executive resigns amid ‘bullying’ and ‘victimisation’ claims
Liverpool Echo 18 February 2015 By Joshua Taylor
Jonathan Herod will continue working as cancer specialist

A top executive at Liverpool Women’s Hospital has resigned.
Jonathan Herod stood down as medical director this week following claims a whistle-blowing member of staff was “bullied and victimised”.
The hospital said his choice to step aside was an “entirely personal” decision.
Mr Herod will continue working at the hospital as a consultant specialising in gynaecological cancer.
But a former employee, Dr Mark Tattersall, claims Mr Herod’s resignation comes after Dr Tattersall was “dismissed” for raising “concerns regarding patient safety”.
The hospital denied this, saying Mr Herod’s choice to stand down was “in no way related” to the decision not to renew Dr Tattersall’s contract.
Dr Tattersall said: “I had been bullied and victimised by himself and other senior members of staff at the trust following my raising of concerns regarding patient safety.”
He continued: “As recently as June 2014… I believe he (Mr Herod) bullied me and made it clear that the trust operated on the basis of a strict hierarchy and that whistle-blowing continued to constitute unacceptable behaviour on the part of an employee.”

Dr Tattersall, now a lecturer in obstetrics and gynaecology at the University of Liverpool, claims bosses later “dismissed me by singling me out for non-renewal of my fixed-term contract”.
He added: “As a matter of principle, I will seek reinstatement to my position within the trust as I feel that this is the only way in which a message will be sent out that victimisation of whistle-blowers in the NHS is unacceptable.”
Mr Herod will be replaced as medical director, one of the hospital’s most senior positions, by Dr Joanne Topping on an interim basis until a full-time successor is appointed.
The Liverpool Women’s NHS Foundation Trust, which runs the hospital, said in a statement: “The trust can confirm that Jonathan Herod resigned from his role as medical director earlier this week.
“The reasons behind Mr Herod’s decision to resign from the position of medical director are entirely personal and are in no way related to the ending of a fixed-term contract of a former employee of the trust.”
The hospital declined to comment on the bullying claims.
Mr Herod became medical director at the Women’s in 2010, having first joined the hospital in 1999.
He introduced a pioneering cervical cancer treatment to the North West that allowed medics to preserve the child-bearing ability of women undergoing radical surgery.
Jeremy Hunt – Help & Justice for NHS whistleblowers
Sent via e-mail
19 February 2015
Rt Hon Mr Jeremy Hunt
Health Secretary
Dear Mr Hunt
Re: Review into NHS whistleblowing led by Sir Robert Francis QC
I had written to you on 30 May 2014, of my desperate case as a NHS whistle-blower (https://sharmilachowdhury.com/2014/06/03/letter-to-jeremy-hunt-2-help-justice-for-sharmila-chowdhury/)
You subsequently after much media pressure, commissioned the review into NHS whistleblowing, led by Sir Robert Francis. Although many were sceptical about this, quite rightly as it now transpires, some of us were naively optimistic.
Although we were advised that the investigation was ‘an independent review’, on hindsight one would have to question whether Sir Robert Francis, who is a non-executive director of CQC, is really ‘independent.’
After much anticipation and delays of over three months, the report was finally published.
To my huge disappointment and those of other NHS whistleblowers, none of the essential requirements necessary to protect a whistle-blower was recommended in the report.
For me these were key failures:
1. No recognition of parts played by CQC and DH during whistleblowing cases. Yet nearly all NHS whistleblowers, I have come across, have sought help from both CQC and DH who have been turned away stating it’s ‘an employment issue’ and ‘therefore cannot get involved’. This practice I have no doubt will continue.
2. No recommendation for a public inquiry into historic cases. This was almost unanimously seen as a vital step forward by whistleblowers and their supporters. Without a public inquiry there is no transparency and no learning from cases.
3. No recommendation for intervention when a whistleblower faces employment dispute – which is nearly always the case following raising concerns. Failure to implement interventions will mean, nothing will change and whistle-blowers will continue to face hefty legal costs, the public will continue to fund Trusts’ cover-ups. These may drag on for years. By which time careers of whistle-blowers have been destroyed, homes are lost and health are damaged. Patients will also have lost a valued member of staff and taxpayers have lost vast sums of money. More importantly, patients will continue to be placed at risk.
4. No redress for suffering whistleblowers. I had asked for reinstatement of full income and pension in cases where there is a career loss. Despite now having a full knowledge what whistleblowers endure you have shamefully chosen to do nothing. Some whistle-blowers are totally destitute.
This is despite it being recommended recently by the Health Select Committee, ‘We expect the NHS to respond in a timely, honest and open manner to patients, and we must expect the same for staff. We recommend that there should be a programme to identify whistle-blowers who have suffered serious harm and whose actions are proven to have been vindicated, and provide them with an apology and practical redress.’
5. There is no help available with legal expenses when whistleblowers face ruin due to extensive legal battle. This contrasts with fulsome support afforded to Trusts, with the approval of DH and the Treasury. Highlighting this hypocrisy, current cases show that this purse remains wide open to Trusts.
6. There will be no ‘Independent’ Governing body who will investigate whistleblowing cases. By ‘independent’ I refer to an organisation outside the remit of DH and CQC, who have previously failed to support whistleblowers. Having a workplace ‘guardian’ is hardly independent and will be of no value and will do little to encourage confidence. Additionally having an independent National Officer will not provide effective support – ‘to advise NHS organisations to take appropriate action where they have failed …..’
7. No recommendation for help with jobs of same stature and income. Page 26 Principle 12 as you know is wholly inadequate.
I had already written to you on this matter as this is an example I have found myself in. ‘Finding an alternative employment’ is simply not good enough. Trusts being forced to take on a whistleblower does not bode well. Neither is it good for a whistleblower to be forced into a job which is not their background or expertise. This leads to stress and a strained relationship with their employer, and bullying can result.
If alternative posts are to be found then these posts need to be permanent and of same pay, expertise and stature to the one lost. If whistleblowers are ill and or de-skilled, they should also be fully supported with either rehabilitation, with pay, and or a fair pension, as appropriate. The bottom line is, it should be clear to all that whistleblowing does not result in loss.
Imagine Mr Hunt finding yourself losing your job and someone finds you an alternative post in something completely unrelated. For example, taxi driving or selling fast food, at minimum wage. Would you be happy or feel grateful?
8. There is no robust recommendation for swiftly holding to account the many corrupt individuals who covered up. This is despite reams of evidence that Sir Robert accepted was consistent and credible. In my own case, those who victimised me, and covered up fraud, remain happily employed.
I am enclosing a link to an article on response to Francis’s review.
https://sharmilachowdhury.com/2015/02/17/response-to-francis-report/
You have listened to us but have continued to ignore our request for genuine help.
Personally, I continue to face a very uncertain future whilst suffering from cancer. I may be homelessness in due course. Yet, you have chosen not to intervene. Additionally, you have refused to organise an independent investigation into my raised concerns. This shows the hollowness of the review exercise, and the government’s response.
Those that were responsible for possible fraud and my dismissal are still in employment. The lack of accountability sends a clear message that one can bully and get away with it.
You have turned your back on NHS whistleblowers and by doing this you have also turned your back on vulnerable patients, who depend and trust staff to speak up when they see wrongdoings. You have also failed the tax paying public whose hard earned monies continue to be wasted.
I urge that you reconsider your actions and offer genuine help to NHS whistleblowers, and to re-open cases through a full Public Inquiry.
With Kind regards
Sharmila Chowdhury
Response to Francis Report
After much publicity and media coverage Sir Robert Francis was commissioned a review into NHS whistleblowing
After three month delays Francis report into whistleblowing was finally published on 11 February 2015. There were numerous media coverage of the publication of the report.
What about the coverage after published report? Here are some of them:
So what did NHS whistleblowers and their supporters think?
I think the Speak Up review helps to advance understanding of what happens to NHS whistleblowers, but it does not reveal the full picture. I found it disappointing overall, as do a number of other whistleblowers.
Through its weakness, Robert Francis' report ultimately fails patients.
Fiona Bell:
Well the long awaited Francis report on whistle blowing , The review its self was finally an acknowledgement of the fact all is not well in our NHS . For years many of us having been highlighting these problems at great personal cost. It has taken many years to simply get the acknowledgement that something needed to be done. Would we have had the Francis report without the persistent pressure ? Without the help of Social media , some straight talking ,open emails and of course the help of our national press highlighting our concerns? I suspect not . The review team had to work within the terms of reference, That I accept , however I don't believe those in power can clap their hands in joy and claim to have addressed the issues raised and found us all a miracle solution . Why are those that bullied , harassed and hounded good staff out of their jobs still in post? Who protects the guardians? And will we now have a new wave of unprotected naive whistle blowers that assume because of the review it is now safe to speak up? Has anything really changed ? Has there been a culture change over night? was there at the very least a public apology from. Mr Hunt ? An apology may seem unimportant when there are much bigger issues, but let's face it, if a government/DH/nhs can't deliver a simple basic apology to all those that have lost so much, then what hope is there for the complete culture change? In order for all to move forward the issues of the past need to have been addressed , Nothing has changed for those that sacrificed so much in order to protect patients . Friday 13th Canary Wharf I met yet again with a whistle blower , despite The Francis review, the trust in his case continue to persecute. Beware there is no overnight fix, those that bully, victimise, persecute have not been disciplined nor are they likely to be . It is often said to me patient complainants suffer in the same way whistle blowers do , it's true. Being a Nhs whistle blower and complainant I have seen this time and time again , many patients themselves, their families are still afraid to complain , leaving issues unresolved . It is the same for whistle blowers . Patient families still continue to knock on the door for help despite the other Francis Report , I don't expect my case load to decrease in the coming year . Whistle blowing & Complaining comes with a heavy price tag , The day you dare to speak up is the day your world is turned upside down and life is never ever the same again. On the plus side through out the past 7 years I have had the privilege of meeting some incredibly brave people .
Jo Gilbert
The Francis report was not only 3 months late but could have easily been written without anyone ever meeting a live whistleblower. It is virtually a lit. review that contains readily available information about what employers do to whistleblowers, collated from existing reports and research.
Will it make one iota of difference to current whistleblowers? (“Current” is defined as those of us who are still asking and waiting for help four, five, ten years after we reported and were vindicated. There is no such thing as “historic” whistleblowing.)
The answer is “No”. It will make no difference whatsoever. Francis and the report editors intentionally neglected to include any suggestions about what will be done to right the wrongs that everyone acknowledges has been done to those of us still fighting for justice.
Will it make a difference to those who might have been “future whistleblowers”? Probably. It is likely to discourage them from making protected disclosures as they have now seen a written report which confirms that many are not protected, and have no recourse. The report confirms that whistleblowers are bullied, illegally sacked and blacklisted by the NHS, ESRs contain illegal and inaccurate data; they will probably see their careers terminated and are likely to lose their homes and families too.
The word “consequences” appears in the report 16 times. In 14 of those cases it refers to consequences of reporting that are experienced by whistleblowers. In one instance the report quickly and vaguely skims over a suggestion that NHS managers will receive “consequences” for doing what it recognises – 14 times – that they do. It simply says “there will be consequences” and does not even suggest what those should be or who will charge them with the offences (p.163, 7.5.8. The other case, p.105, 5.5.15, refers to the reference that will be made in 7.5.8).
We have proved that NHS staff, Board members, NEDs, failed to do their duty, ignored PIDA, committed misconduct in public office and received rewards for their co-operation: Promotions, contracts, payoffs, prestigious positions. Who would voluntarily discontinue this lucrative practice?
These are the facts. Until justice is done for those still struggling and fighting for it, who need nothing more than cash to buy it, this is never going to be over. This is not a life. It is a barely tolerable existence, we did nothing to deserve it and it gets progressively worse. It is not historic. It is daily.
There must be consequences for the many identified NHS staff and NEDs who have destroyed whistleblowers, ridden the Magic Roundabout and are still employed – either within or outside the NHS – before we will accept that our situations are sufficiently understood, are being taken seriously and are being corrected. So far there is no evidence that this is even being considered. There is no safe way to blow the whistle. We waited, tentatively hopeful, for months, for nothing.
Will Powell:
History has repeated itself, yet again, with regards to Sir Robert’s Report on whistleblowers as it would appear that there is no recommendation to address the injustices suffered by individual historic whistleblowers notwithstanding some have lost both their beloved careers and homes. I am told that some may have even lost their lives as a consequence of suicide.
I see whistleblowers and NHS complainants fighting the same cause and that is to improve patient safety issues within our NHS. However, the establishment see us as the enemy, not because we are wrong, but because we expose gross failures in the system and individuals, which is clearly detrimental to the wellbeing of our NHS. The establishment would rather cover up errors than address them for the better of all. There is conveniently no accountability when protocols, guidelines and laws are blatantly breached and that’s exactly how the establishment, in my view, want it to stay. I believe Sir Robert has failed again to ensure accountability when whistleblowers are vilified for speaking out.
It also frustrates me so very much when I hear arguments that healthcare professionals fear being open and honest about errors because of the alleged blame culture. All patients request is that doctors who make mistakes should be honest and accept responsibility for their actions – is that really too much to ask in a purported democratic country? It’s not the blame culture that healthcare professionals should fear but the consequences when they decide to lie and cover up their mistakes. The cover up culture in the NHS is like a very naughty child – it needs to receive appropriate punishment to make it stop.
Paul Cardin:
Lack of support for whistleblowers is a disgrace
Lack of support for whistleblowers is a disgrace
The Guardian Sunday 15 February 2015 20.31 GMT
The Guardian has a laudable track record of supporting whistleblowing. However, in commenting on the impact of the Francis report on the culture of speaking up in the NHS (Editorial, 12 February), you demonstrate a rather conservative approach to legislative reform. First, there is no mention of possible criminal sanctions. Citizens who break the Official Secrets Act commit an offence, so why shouldn’t those who victimise people raising concerns in the public interest? The Protection from Harassment Act can be invoked if the narrow definition of harassment is fulfilled, but, in my opinion, outlawing any form of retaliation against whistleblowers would send out a valuable message about what society expects.
Second, you do not point out that only “workers” are covered by our whistleblowing legislation. However, it is clear that those who are in a position to raise concerns may not have this status – for example, patients and their families. Other countries now recognise the role that the public can play in exposing wrongdoing; in this important respect, the UK no longer provides an international model.
Professor David Lewis
Director, Whistleblowing research unit, Middlesex University
Were those hospital bosses prosecuted for conspiring against the public? Are they walking free?
Kevin McGrath
• Support and protection for whistleblowers is obviously essential, and it is disgraceful that it has failed to be adequately ensured for years. But that is only half the story. There needs to be effective action to deter those who would seek to harass or persecute whistleblowers, whoever they are.
“Doctors and nurses and other NHS staff who reported their anxieties about failings in patient care had been shunned, suspended and even sacked by hospital bosses,” the piece says. So what happened to the hospital bosses concerned? Were they prosecuted for conspiring against the public? Are they walking free? Until those who would harass whistleblowers know that doing so will endanger their careers and their liberty, warm words about how whistleblowers are “heroes working in the public interest” will be hollow.
Kevin McGrath
Harlow, Essex
• You say giving whistleblowers a percentage of any savings would be too transactionable for the UK. I strongly disagree. Whistleblowers, by your own admission, face career suicide, impoverishment and marriage breakdown. Paying them would strengthen their resolve.
John Richards
Oxford
• Whistleblowing can never work in a service such as the NHS, which depends entirely on trust and cooperation, and on personal references when it comes to promotion or merit awards. How many will be willing to sacrifice their entire professional careers and suffer isolation in their place of work for the public good? There is nothing the law can do about that. Safeguarding best practice needs independent monitors with statutory powers, whom patients and relatives can approach in every locality, as with community health councils, which, sadly, were abolished in the interests of efficiency savings.
Dr Richard Turner
Harrogate, North Yorkshire
• I believe Andrew Smith’s analysis of the problem faced by whistleblowers beyond the NHS is spot-on (We need to protect whistleblowers outside the NHS too, 13 February). Senior managers in the housing association where I work do indeed “defend their preposterous benefits through empire-building and the ruthless quashing of dissent”.
The narrative here is about “more from less”and “We are now estate agents, not social workers.” Everyone has to be “on message”, and employees are left in no doubt that the FIFO rule (Fit in or fuck off) applies. Anyone seeking to question the actions of management, whether because of a commitment to personal ethical values, professional standards or even regulatory requirement, is soon seeking alternative employment. No one dares to question management about anything any more.
I hear of so many similar stories from people working in schools, social services, universities and even voluntary organisations that it seems the management culture Andrew Smith exposes now dominates the publicly funded sector.
Name and address withheld
• Honorary knighthoods are given to non-Commonwealth citizens who have given great assistance to this country. I suggest one is given to the HSBC whistleblower, Hervé Falciani. What chance David Cameron’s support?
Stephen Foster
Christchurch, Dorset
• I worked as an independent volunteer in our local hospital. My job was to take patients a questionnaire that asked them to grade many aspects of their stay, including cleanliness, communications and clinical care. There was space for detailing any complaints they had.
These forms were submitted to the most senior nurses on the ward, and the volunteers had time to discuss the patients’ concerns.
Everyone involved, in any way, in the hospital had to attend a regular talk given by the chief executive or his deputy. This talk strongly encouraged anyone to flag up anything at all that they saw giving cause for concern in the hospital. The fact that these meetings were headed by the top brass demonstrated how seriously they took any complaints. Instead of further formal legislation, I suggest that these strategies could be helpful in all cases where patients are being cared for.
Pam Davey
South Petherton, Somerset
Dear Sir Robert Francis, your report on NHS whistlebowers is not enough – we need action on how these brave professionals can be helped
Jeremy Hunt – is ‘sorry’ really the hardest word?
By Fiona Bell
From: Fbell
Date: 11 February 2015 00:27:30 GMT
To: “mb-sofs@dh.gsi.gov.uk” <mb-sofs@dh.gsi.gov.uk>, huntj@parliament.ukSubject: Francis report
Dear Mr Hunt,
On the 28th October I listened as you spoke at the zero harm event , at that event you may recall I asked for an apology, for all families that had lost loved ones because of unsafe care and for our NHS whistle blowers. You went on to explain that you often wrote to families to apologise, but without wanting to appear harsh that did not address the issue , you simply gave the answer of a politician and talked around the issue.
Tomorrow you will give your response to the Francis report on whistle blowing , many people will have hopes and expectations that may well seem impossible to fulfil.
So once again I ask again for a public apology for bereaved families and whistle blowers. A simple apology costs nothing , litigation however costs the tax payer a small fortune.
Kind Regards
Fiona Bell
Imagine my surprise today when I get such a prompt response . …...
From: DoNotReply@dh.gsi.gov.uk
Date: 12 February 2015 11:25:36 GMT
To: fbell
Subject: Response to your Query : – Ref:DE00000897093 – Your correspondence about whistleblowing.Our ref: DE00000897093
Dear Ms Bell,
Thank you for your recent correspondence about whistleblowing, and your call for the Secretary of State for Health to make a public statement. I have been asked to reply.
I hope you had the chance to see Mr Hunt’s statement in the House of Commons yesterday. A link to the transcript of that statement is here:https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/francis-report-update-and-response.
Yours sincerely,
Alan Addison
Ministerial Correspondence and Public Enquiries
Department of HealthOne would ask do our politicians not understand a simple plain English request , it appears that “sorry” really is the hardest word.
Channel 5 News: ‘Calls to protect NHS whistleblowers’
Channel 5 News 11 Feb 2015
Whistleblower whitewash: Health staff who dare to speak out will still not be protected, says report
By SOPHIE BORLAND and CLAIRE ELLICOTT and DANIEL MARTIN FOR THE DAILY MAIL
- Lead Barrister said whistleblowers treated as ‘snitches and backstabbers’
- Called for guardians at each NHS trust to protect those who expose abuse
- But report contains no extra legal protection for those who come forward
- Campaigners brand it an ‘affront’, ’empty words’ and ‘disappointing’

A report into the NHS’s shocking treatment of whistleblowers was yesterday branded a ‘whitewash’ that will do nothing to protect staff who raise concerns.
The long-awaited findings warned of a culture of ‘fear, bullying and ostracisation’ within the health service that punished doctors and nurses who dared speak out.
But whistleblowers whose careers have been ruined after issuing warnings over patient care were furious that among the 20 recommendations were no sanctions against bosses who bullied staff or made them sign gagging orders.
There is also growing unease about a key clause in the report which strongly urges whistleblowers not to speak to the Press – advising staff instead to talk to journalists only as a ‘last resort’ to avoid causing ‘considerable distress.’
One measure even includes a full-time ‘whistleblowing guardian’ at every hospital and Trust to whom staff could go with their concerns.
Led by barrister Sir Robert Francis, who chaired two major inquiries into the Mid Staffordshire hospital scandal, the report told of how whistleblowers are too often derided as ‘snitches, troublemakers and backstabbers.’
It said many are ‘victimised’ by managers, forced out of their jobs and unable to find other work because they are in effect blacklisted in the NHS.
The Government has promised to enforce all of Sir Robert’s 20 recommendations and other key reforms aimed at changing NHS culture so that staff can raise concerns without fear of reprisals.
Yet whistleblowers said the document contained ‘empty words’ that failed to protect staff and deterred them from speaking to the media – which in the past had helped them expose numerous NHS scandals.
Many felt they had no choice after their concerns were repeatedly ignored by hospital bosses and watchdogs. Gary Walker, the chief executive who was sacked from United Lincolnshire Hospitals after raising concerns that patients were dying, said the recommendations were an ‘affront’ to whistleblowers.
He called for criminal sanctions against managers who forced staff to sign gagging agreements.
Mr Walker, 43, was ordered to sign a £500,000 gagging order in 2012 which he bravely defied by speaking to the Mail the following year.
John Marchant, who lost his job as head of security at The Dudley Group Foundation Trust after raising concerns that patients were being restrained, said: ‘No one is being held to account.
‘The CEOs (chief executives) at these hospital Trusts are still CEOs and if they get a lot of complaints they just move to another position as a CEO,’
Julie Bailey, who helped expose the Mid Staffordshire scandal after the death of her mother Bella in 2007, said the report was ‘disappointing’ and did not go far enough.
She called for criminal sanctions against managers who victimise whistleblowers.
‘The new report is a little disappointing,’ she said. ‘There is no more protection for whistleblowers as a result.
‘Robert Francis’ recommendations from the Mid Staffs report were that there should be criminal sanctions against these people.
‘He didn’t want a blame culture but we need people held to account in society as a whole.
‘Until we start doing that, we are never going to get a change of culture in the NHS.’
Sir Robert was asked by the Government to lead a review on the treatment of NHS whistleblowers last June after heading two inquiries into Mid Staffordshire hospital which concluded that at least 400 patients died from neglect.
The barrister and his team spoke to 600 NHS staff while 19,800 other employees gave their views on an online survey.
His 222-page report concluded that managers were inclined to ‘delay, defend and deny’ allegations made by whistleblowers – often because they were implicated.
Sir Robert said: ‘What I heard during the course of the review from staff, employers, regulators and unions and others leaves me in no doubt that there’s a serious problem in the NHS.
‘Too often, honestly-expressed anxieties have met with hostility and breakdown of working relationships. Worse still, some people suffer life-changing events, they lose their jobs, their careers and even their health.


Tory Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt (left) promised to call time on bullying within the NHS, backing all of the report’s proposals, a move echoed by shadow Health Secretary Andy Burnham (right)
‘We heard all too frequently of jobs being lost, but also of serious psychological damage, even to the extent of suicidal depression.
‘In short, lives can be ruined by poor handling of staff who have raised concerns.’
Health secretary Jeremy Hunt promised to call time on ‘bullying, intimidation and victimisation’ which has ‘no place in our NHS.’
He told the Commons: ‘The only way we will build an NHS with the highest standards is if the doctors and nurses who have given their lives to patient care always feel listened to when they speak out about patient care.
‘The message must go out today that we are calling time on bullying, intimidation and victimisation, which have no place in our NHS.’
‘We will ensure that every member of staff, NHS manager and NHS leader has proper training on how to raise concerns and how to treat people who raise concerns.’
Labour also backed the recommendations and Shadow Health Secretary Andy Burnham said there was ‘plenty of common ground’ between the two parties,
He added: ‘Our shared aim must be to create a climate where any NHS worker feels able to raise concerns, confident they will be listened to and that appropriate action will be taken and not face mistreatment as a result.’
NHS workers victimised for revealing hospital scandals to Press
FORCED TO SIGN GAGGING CONTRACT
Gary Walker submitted a large body of evidence to the inquiry but was never asked about his experiences or his recommendations.
He told the Mail that the report was a ‘whitewash’ and that it provides no extra protection for staff who raise concerns.
‘Patients are dying and whistleblowers are being sacked for pointing that out,’ he said.
‘The report doesn’t address that and Francis clearly hasn’t understood the seriousness of the problem. He’s a man of the establishment and he protects the establishment and has produced the report that you would expect. Francis has pulled his punches.
‘This report will not change the NHS at all. I don’t see any change in culture as a result. There is no extra protection for whistleblowers as a result of this report.’
Mr Walker, 43, was sacked as chief executive of the United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust after raising concerns that meeting targets were being put ahead of patient safety.
He was forced to sign a £500,000 gagging contract, but broke his silence with the Daily Mail following the Robert Francis report into Mid-Staffordshire where up to 1,200 patients died unnecessarily.
‘I broke my gag because his report failed to apportion any blame and did not hold any individuals to account,’ he said.
‘This has now happened again. All the people who have gagged whistleblowers in the past will carry on in their jobs with their big fat salaries and will not be held to account. The solution is to sack the people who victimise the whistleblowers.’
Mr Walker said that an independent person from outside the NHS should be appointed for whistleblowers to bring their concerns to.
‘It’s not safe for whistleblowers to report their concerns to employers,’ he added. ‘It’s been proved by the hundreds of whistleblowers out there who have been sacked, gagged and had their lives destroyed after reporting concerns.’
Last night, other NHS whistleblowers told of their fury that their former bosses had not been named and shamed and branded the report a ‘whitewash’.
‘HIRED TO FIDDLE DEATH FIGURES’
NHS whistleblower Sandra Haynes Kirkbright said no one had even bothered to call her to hear her story for the Francis report.
The administrator was suspended for almost three years after claiming she was hired by The Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust to fiddle death figures.
‘I am still in limbo,’ she said. ‘Nobody called me about the Francis report. They don’t want to talk to me now. They didn’t care enough to call me.
‘Has anything changed? This is all just about a political agenda.’

13-YEAR BATTLE OVER UNFAIR DISMISSAL
Top surgeon Raj Mattu warned that whistleblowers were ‘no safer’ following the report.
The doctor was unfairly dismissed and persecuted for a decade after warnings over cardiac patient safety at University Hospital Coventry but was cleared of wrongdoing after a 13-year battle costing the taxpayer £10million.
He said of the Francis report: ‘He’s given charge of the solution to the very people who were part of the problem in the first place – those who were instrumental in the Mid-Staffs cover-up and instrumental in cases against whistleblowers like myself and David Drew.
‘Leopards don’t change their spots. I would say to NHS whistleblowers, you are no safer today than you were yesterday. This is a missed opportunity to make the NHS safer for patients.’
John Marchant lost his job as head of security at The Dudley Group Foundation Trust after raising concerns that elderly patients and children were being restrained against their will.
Of yesterday’s report, he said: ‘No one is being held to account.
‘The CEOs at these hospital trusts are still CEOs and if they get a lot of complaints they just move to another position as a CEO.
‘Why publish it? It is not holding people to account. Just another whitewash.
‘CATASTROPHIC’ FAILURES WARNING
Paediatrician David Drew, who was sacked after complaining about ‘catastrophic’ failures at Walsall Manor Hospital, said the report failed to address previous whistleblowing cases.
‘What we want is all our old cases opened up, so we can have some actual retribution,’ he said.
‘We need our jobs back, our careers back. We need a proper public inquiry and to have the individual cases looked at.
‘There have been some evil CEOs. The whole toxic lying and bullying has to come out. Some of the bosses should go to jail for what they have done.’

FORCED OUT AFTER REPORTING £250K LOSS
Sharmila Chowdhury, who has suffered cancer since losing her job, said that it was ‘scandalous’ that no one had been held to account.
The radiography manager for Ealing Hospital NHS Trust was sacked for telling bosses that £250,000 of public money had been lost through moonlighting by two medical consultants.
‘It’s scandalous that we have lost our jobs, careers and in some cases our homes and health, yet still no one has been held to account,’ she said.
‘The CEOs are left to enjoy a normal life despite their wrong-doing, while whistleblowers who did their job and spoke up have been left with nothing.’
SPOKE OUT ABOUT BRUTAL TREATMENT
David Ore, who was fired for complaining about the brutal treatment of patients at the failing Russells Hall Hospital in Dudley, said the report contained ‘empty words’.
‘The report is grossly unfair to the frontline workers who raise concerns then get ignored, marginalised and accused of trumped up accusations,’ he said.
‘It’s a lot of empty words that will have cost the public a few million pounds to say what we all knew already.’
NHS whistleblower: report doesn’t go far enough
The most senior NHS whistleblower has said a major new report into the problem, published today, doesn’t go anywhere near far enough. Gary Walker, the former Chief Executive of the United Lincolnshire Hospitals Trust, who lost his job five years ago before speaking out, says not enough is being done to tackle those who victimise staff who voice their concerns.
The Freedom to Speak Up report was written by the QC Sir Robert Francis who says the NHS needs to undergo a culture change when it comes to whistleblowing. Those who do speak out, he says, often find themselves in a “toxic mix of grievance and disciplinary action” from their bosses.
He’s laid out 20 principles and wants freedom to speak up guardians in every hospital and an independant national officer to review complaints. He says something needs to happen now.
Whistleblowing:’It’s still not safe for us to speak out’
The Telegraph
Whistle-blowers say Sir Robert Francis’s report fails to offer enough protection to staff to who speak out and will not encourage others to come forward
Whistle-blowers have warned more needs to be done to protect them and encourage others in the NHS to speak out, despite the recommendations in Sir Robert Francis’s report.
Amanda Pollard, a senior inspector with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) watchdog who resigned after saying that the organisation “would not spot another Stafford” – the hospital where failings led to hundreds of “excess deaths” – said Sir Robert’s recommendations would have done little to protect her at the time.
She told The Telegraph: “The legal protection he recommends seems to be aimed at people who are looking for work after being forced out of their job for whistleblowing, rather than protecting whistle blowers in their organisation.”
Mrs Pollard said several of the principles put forward by Sir Robert to protect whistle-blowers depended on the good will of NHS trusts and bodies to implement them.
“Saying that the culture needs to be more open relies on that organisation wanting to be more open. Where is the incentive for them to do that? And where are the sanctions if they don’t? There don’t appear to be any” she said.
Mrs Pollard, who had worked in the NHS for 20 years, left the CQC in 2013 after growing increasingly frustrated with the behaviour of management as she tried to alert them to her concerns.
She complained to her managers after the CQC disbanded its infection control teams – which advised hospitals on the crucial task reducing the risk to patients of ‘superbug’ infections such as MRSA, C. diff and E-coli – and transferred the inspectors to regional teams.
The result was that Mrs Pollard and her colleagues found themselves inspecting care homes and nursing homes, in which they had no expertise or knowledge. She told Mid-Staffs inquiry: “I could not believe that something so effective could be thrown away.”
Mrs Pollard said on Wednesday: “If all of Sir Robert’s recommendations were in place now I would still be hesitant about coming forward with my concerns.
“I just don’t see how his recommendations would have helped my case or changed what happened to me.”
Mrs Pollard, who has found it impossible to get work elsewhere in the NHS since speaking out over her fears, also questioned how effective Sir Robert’s proposal for ‘whistle-blower guardians’ would be if they were recruited from the ranks of NHS managers.
“For them to be fully effective they need to be at board level. If they were trust managers they could easily be accused of not being independent,” she said.
Robert Rose, a medical negligence lawyer with Lime Solicitors, said other pledges this week to introduce financial sanctions for hospitals that fail to be honest about clinical mistakes were “likely to make little difference” if NHS whistle-blowers remained unprotected.
He said: “Potential whistleblowers must be able to voice their concerns safe in the knowledge that this will not negatively impact on their careers. Until this is addressed, and a watertight process is put in place where staff can safely raise concerns, the culture within the NHS will not change.”
David Drew, a consultant paediatrician who claimed he was sacked after raising the alarm over a toddler who died after being discharged from Walsall Manor Hospital, said the Francis review underlined existing problems but that the failure to help those whose lives had been crushed remained an “open sore” on the NHS.
He added: “We will be back campaigning for reopening of cases of sacked whistle-blowers.”
In April 2012 an employment tribunal rejected Mr Drew’s claims of unfair dismissal, religious discrimination and victimisation against Walsall Hospitals NHS Trust.
Gary Walker, the former chief executive of United Lincolnshire Hospitals Trust, said Sir Robert’s recommendations would prove to be “completely ineffective”.
He said: “The focus should have been on dealing with the individuals who victimise whistle-blowers, and these are usually trust board members. Sir Robert seems to be saying that no one is to blame and that’s absolutely ridiculous.”
Mr Walker claimed his warning to senior NHS figures about patient safety were ignored for years until he was eventually sacked by the trust in 2010, ostensively for swearing in meetings.
Raj Mattu, a cardiologist who publicly exposed overcrowding at Walsgrave Hospital in Coventry in 2001, claiming it might have led to avoidable deaths, said there still a lack of “sufficient protection” for potential whistle-blowers.
Dr Mattu said earlier that Sir Robert’s recommendations were “of no value if they are not going to be enforced”.
He added: “As of today, I don’t believe there are sufficient protections in place that are of any value. I couldn’t possibly recommend anybody else whistle blow at this moment and go through the sort of ordeal I and others have gone through.”
Hundreds of senior doctors and nurses gave evidence to Sir Robert about how their careers came to a standstill after they tried to alert NHS managers of unsafe practices and cost-cutting risking lives.
Sir Robert told The Telegraph the NHS should exploit the idealism of its doctors and nurses and not crush those who put patients first.
Dr Mattu welcomed Sir Robert’s report, but added: “It’s frustrating and depressing to hear that whilst there is often and periodically noises made about … protecting whistle-blowers, the reality is there are very few palpable, material changes that take place.
“Today even, the culture is very unsafe. There is still ongoing persecution of whistle-blowers on a grand scale.”
Dr Mattu said: “Large numbers of managers in the NHS are in there for a different reason to the nurses and doctors. Most of us come in because we want to care for people. Managers largely come from a background of wanting a career in management.
“Many of us who are whistle-blowers feel compelled and a moral obligation to speak up. I saw practices in my hospital that were putting patient safety and lives at risk.”
Some whistle-blowers were more enthusiastic about the report.
Roger Davidson, currently Head of Media and Public Affairs at NHS England, said: “A culture of denial has absolutely no place in our NHS – there should be no ifs or buts. The fact this report has been produced is a powerful first step. It sets the direction and provides a yardstick against which we can measure. But it’s behaviours that will make a difference. I hope the NHS roots out poor behaviour and drives strong values-based leadership to every corner of the health service.”
Mr Davidson lost his job as head of media and public affairs for the CQC just before the 2010 general election, after telling how a quarter of NHS trusts had failed to meet basic hygiene standards.
He also warned that the CQC had stopped telling the public how to find reports on infections in their local hospitals in order to limit publicity damaging to the NHS.
Mr Davidson was forced to sign a gagging order when he left, but his testimony emerged during the Francis inquiry into the failings at Mid-Staffs.
Sir Robert’s proposal to station “freedom to speak up guardians” in hospitals to help staff in coming forward was based on an idea by Helene Donnelly, a nurse who raised the alarm at Stafford Hospital.
Ms Donnelly, who advised Sir Robert on how whistle-blowers could be helped and now works as ambassador for cultural change at Stafford, suggested the guardians would be able to go over the head of hospital boards who failed to act appropriately.
“(In the) worst case scenario, if the board fails to act and there is serious patient or staff safety risk, they can then take it externally to an external guardian and all the other regulators as well to ensure the problem is dealt with,” she said.
The campaign group Patients First said: “We believe that those staff who are brave enough to raise patient safety concerns should be treasured, not bullied, and look to Jeremy Hunt to decisively act to help change the prevailing culture in large parts of the NHS and protect such staff.”
But Chris Hopson, chief executive of NHS Providers, the association of NHS foundation trusts and trusts, said that while “there is a significant minority of trusts where whistle-blowers are not being treated appropriately”, the NHS had been ranked as the safest health care system in the world.
Mr Hopson said out that only 0.06% of NHS interactions with patients ended in complaints and that more that 80% of patients were satisfied with the care they received.
ITV News : “Treatment of whistleblowers truly shocking”
‘Climate of fear’: NHS staff scared of exposing danger to patients, whistleblowers tell RT
Published time: February 11, 2015 16:13

An inquiry that found many NHS staff do not raise concerns about patient safety because they fear being ignored or bullied did not go far enough, whistle-blowing health professionals told RT.
The Freedom to Speak Up Review found a “climate of fear” permeates the NHS in England, with whistleblowers subject to “shocking” treatment when they attempt to speak out.
Sir Robert Francis QC, who led the inquiry, made a series of recommendations in his report including the appointment of “guardians” in each hospital to support staff who want to raise concerns.
However, two former whistleblowers who spoke to RT, said the report fell short of tackling the real problems facing staff who speak out.
A group of former NHS staff protesting against the service’s “horrific” treatment of whistleblowers on Wednesday claimed the report did not go far enough to stop further incidents happening.
Carrying placards calling for “more accountability” and “more transparency” in the NHS, the group marched from Millbank Tower to Downing Street.
Minh Alexander, a former consultant psychiatrist and whistleblower who joined the protest, outlined areas where the report fell short.
Speaking to RT, she said: “I question whether the proposals go far enough and will prove in time to be protective to other whistleblowers who arise from now on.”
“Based on our collective experience, NHS organizations can be extremely devious and there is a lack of independence between NHS organizations and regulators, in our opinion,” she added.
“I think this report doesn’t fully address that or remedy it.”
Dr David Drew, a respected pediatrician who was sacked for gross misconduct after raising serious concerns about patient protection, admitted the report had some good recommendations.
He told RT: “This is a good report, [Francis] worked hard to understand the situation. He’s come to understand the horrific reaction that whistleblowers in the NHS can meet … and he’s recommended a few things which may help to calm that down in the future.
“But the big problem is that he has done nothing to address the problems of those people who have been ruined as a result of whistleblowing in the past,” he said.
Drew was fired after a 37-year career in the NHS for sending a well-known prayer to staff by email.
He claims the real reason for his dismissal was because he questioned the competence of a fellow consultant who sent a toddler with “suspicious injuries” home in 2007, only for the child to be killed by his step-father a week later.
An independent investigation into 16-month-old Kyle Keen’s death found it could have been prevented.
Drew’s unjust dismissal is an example of the “shocking” treatment Sir Robert Francis heard about during his inquiry.
Drew believes the report should recommend giving assistance to whistleblowers who risk everything to tell the truth.
“There are 30- and 40-year-old people who lost their jobs, their careers, they’re ruined financially through the tribunals. Their health is gone, often, they have no future, and Sir Robert has not been able to make any recommendation to help those people.
“I think that’s wrong and it’s something we will be continuing to campaign on,” he added.
The Freedom to Speak Up Review does recommend the NHS help workers who, as a result of raising concerns, are unable to carry on in their current employment.
While the report recommends the NHS “establish a support scheme” for whistleblowers who cannot find work in health service, it stipulates this should apply to workers “whose performance is sound.”
As such, NHS whistleblowers like Dr Drew, who were sacked on trumped up charges of “gross misconduct,” may not be eligible for support.
While conducting the inquiry, Francis heard evidence from 600 people. Another 19,000 filled out an online survey.
READ MORE: ‘Inexcusable pain’: MPs slam NHS for whistleblower treatment
Speaking to the BBC on Wednesday, Francis said: “I’ve heard some frankly shocking stories about [staff] whose health has suffered, and in rare cases who’ve felt suicidal as a result of their perception of them being ignored or worse.”
Key recommendations made in his report include the appointment of “guardians” in hospitals to support staff who raise concerns.
Francis calls for a national independent officer to help guardians when whistleblower cases are encountering problems.
The report also called for new processes to be established at all NHS trusts to ensure staff and patient concerns are investigated properly.









