I have indicated that I would provide regular updates as the work of the Inquiry progresses and as we approach Easter, I wish to provide an indication of the evidence that the Inquiry will be hearing after the Easter break.
From January we have been hearing from witnesses with evidence relevant to Term (e) of our Terms of Reference relating to the Southern Health and Social Care Trust’s (the Trust) handling of the “Maintaining High Professional Standards” (MHPS) process.
I want to take this opportunity to thank those individuals who have given evidence to the Inquiry to date. I am aware that doing so is a stressful experience and recognise that in some cases it involves recollection of events that took place a number of years ago, requiring people to look back to e-mails and documents that were perhaps long forgotten. The Inquiry wishes to assure those from whom we have heard that their evidence has been of great benefit in helping us to understand what happened in the Trust’s use of the MHPS process relating to Mr Aidan O’Brien.
The Inquiry will hear from more witnesses dealing with Term (e) until 30 March.
We will sit again week commencing 17 April and that week we will hear from Mr O’Brien. At this stage of our work Mr O’Brien’s evidence will focus solely on the Trust’s handling of the MHPS investigation. I have previously said and wish to state once again that Mr O’Brien’s practice, while the catalyst for the work of this Inquiry is not the primary focus of our work. We are concerned with issues of clinical and corporate governance within the Trust. The Inquiry intends to call Mr O’Brien back at a later date to deal with some of those issues of clinical and corporate governance.
On 25 April the Inquiry will start hearing from other witnesses who we have identified as being able to provide evidence relevant to those governance issues, and from whom we have determined we must receive oral evidence. As before we will sit on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays in blocks of 2 sitting weeks. and will conclude for the summer on 29 June. I can assure the public that ‘non-sitting’ does not mean ‘non-working’. Much work is needed in preparation for the hearings, both by the Inquiry itself and by the core participants whose witnesses are called.
Post summer we intend to recommence hearings on 12 September. While we have not yet scheduled witnesses post summer, they will be those who can give evidence relevant to our Terms of Reference and we will endeavour to provide as much notice to each of them as possible. I have indicated that we are likely to hear from some more patients, and the Inquiry will contact those we wish to hear from during the summer. I will provide a further update in early September.
Finally, I wish to thank Dr Swart and Mr Hanbury for their continued support and advice and the legal team and secretariat without whose commitment and hard work the Inquiry could not progress.