Neale: Will we ever be told the truth?
Barry Nelson
16/03/2002
Victims of Richard Neale - the bungling doctor who left scores of patients
facing a lifetime of pain - claimed last night the truth would never be
known after losing a court battle with the Government.
Former patients had asked the High Court to overturn a decision by Health
Secretary Alan Milburn to hold an investigation into the Neale affair
behind closed doors.
Instead, a judge upheld Mr Milburn's decision to block a full inquiry.
Last night, bitter campaigners said the decision meant patients rights
had been "put back a decade."
And former Tory leader William Hague said the court decision would make
it "impossible" to get at the truth about the surgeon, who worked at the
Friarage Hospital, in Northallerton, North Yorkshire.
Campaigners plan to appeal against the decision.
Mr Neale was struck off in July, 2000, after 34 sample counts of professional
misconduct were proved against him.
Despite being struck off in Canada, the gynaecologist was allowed to
operate in the UK for more than a decade.
Eventually, 88 women claimed they were seriously injured by Mr Neale
and more than 200 made complaints against him.
The campaign group hoped that a public inquiry would help them establish:
- Why was a surgeon struck off in Canada allowed to operate on British
women for so long?
- Why did managers and colleagues stand by him while the evidence of
his incompetence piled up?
- How could NHS bosses palm him off on another hospital by giving him
a good reference and a handsome pay-off.
An investigation by North Yorkshire police found insufficient evidence
to take any further action, although detectives in Canada are continuing
with their own investigations.
The Department of Health plans to hold an independent inquiry, but it
will take evidence in private.
As a concession, the inquiry panel will be chaired by an independent
lawyer and not an NHS doctor, as was originally proposed.
Witnesses will also be allowed to talk to the Press after giving evidence.
But lawyers representing patients will not be allowed to cross-examine
or call witnesses.
Mr Justice Scott Baker, sitting in London, ruled: "There is no legitimate
expectation that because the Government has ordered public inquiries into
other disasters in the past there would be a public inquiry in the Neale
case."
The only crumb of comfort is that campaign founder Sheila Wright-Hogeland,
50, who brought the court action, is not expected to face a legal bill
of about £75,000.
Mr Hague said: "This is very regrettable decision. The many victims
of Richard Neale deserve a public inquiry. Now it will be impossible to
be certain that all the facts about this appalling saga are known and
lessons for the future may not be learned."
One of Mr Neale's victims, Irene Stewart, 58, from Seaton Carew, near
Hartlepool, said: "I am absolutely appalled. I have completely lost confidence
in the system."
Other members of the group had phoned her in tears, she said.
Graham Maloney, advisor to the group, said: "It is bitterly disappointing
that we have lost. I think it has set patients' rights back a decade."
Mr Milburn, whose Darlington constituency includes several of Mr Neale's
victims, declined to comment last night.
A spokesman said he could not express a view while there was the possibility
of an appeal.
However, his own department - the Department of Health - was not so
reticent.
A spokeswoman said: "We are pleased that the High Court has confirmed
the Secretary of State's decision to hold these inquiries in private.
This decision was taken only after the most careful consideration of all
the issues in the light of the absolute need to protect NHS patients.
"Subject to consideration of the judgement, and any further appeal brought
by the applicants, we will be looking to appoint the chairs and panel
members as soon as possible."