29 July 2022: Deacon - B
Counsel returned to the internal investigation chronology. The note from the First Minister (Donald Dewar) had expressed concern over the “open mind” approach turning into an “open cheque book”. The witness imagined, with an air of fond recollection at a memory of a dearly departed friend, Mr Dewar using that type of language. But before answering any questions, Ms Deacon said she only saw the document this week and she described the language as, “Very inadvisable, very inaccurate”. She asserted how, “I don’t think that way and I don’t speak that way”. She also stated, “I don’t know who wrote this comment about a PR Exercise”. (Nobody believes you Susie, nobody at all.)
Then we were treated to another reflective meander through recent history, “to shed a little light”, which it didn’t. The witness did “absolutely not, absolutely not” see her internal investigation as a “PR Exercise”. She was asked how someone in her office came to refer to the investigation in the way described. Counsel asked the witness to respond to the accusation that this comment reflected the real opinion of at least the officials. Ms Deacon spoke about “one official” and “another official … (she)” who “worked assiduously” to carry out the investigation. She saw no evidence of the NHS not wanting to engage in the process. She reflected back how in her opinion the officials were “professional and assiduous” and did the best they could. There was also an appeal to it being different times. Counsel asked whether or not calculations were provided to the First Minister about the likely costs involved if financial support were to be provided. She did not know but doubted it. But of course, why would they bother when they already knew the outcome would not require it. The sound of the sewing machines completing the stitch-up job as yet audible.
The actual report of the investigation was next displayed. From the remit, the question was asked why certain associated issues were not included, such as testing and whether other treatments should have been purchased. She said she wanted to stick to answering the question asked by the Haemophilia Society, and not to instigate some thing that would grow arms and legs. It’s called a Public Inquiry, Ms Deacon. You missed your chance at glory.
The findings as recorded in the report said there was “no evidence” of a “policy by Haemophilia Directors deliberately to mislead patients about the risks of hepatitis”. When pushed the witness justified letting this pass unquestioned by referring to how busy she was. She could likely tell how inadequate her answer would be seen to be, so went off on another reflective ramble. She must have thought people would not see through her volume of verbosity as a smoke-screen. Asked if the report adequately covered the remit, she said it had “gone some way” to … yadda-stuff … and somehow we all too quickly got to the journey to Devolution, again. If this writer wanted to know about Scotland’s experiences with Devolution, he would go his academic former university buddy, now a Professor and author at the University of Stirling, and not this woke excuse for an academic and pretend politician who left politics in a strop.
Sir Brian tried to drill down on factors such as how many patients had been spoken to in the course of the investigation. She cited the passage of time (… yawn), but said she was satisfied they had something to put out into the public in response to the questions raised. Then the witness sought to claim how the report had contributed to the opening up of the debate, including as a way to lead up to the Inquiry. (Hey Ms Deacon, over here, here’s another straw, quick, clutch at it.) It would only be a matter of time, no doubt, before the heart-strings were pulled (milked) for effect concerning the death of St Donald of Dewar.
The press release spoke of “an exhaustive fact-finding exercise”, which proved there had been no negligence, no wrong-doing, no new evidence, no bad practice, no thing to see here, no money (… so no justice). Reference was made to the Jeremy Hunt evidence related to there being a culture of group-think which asserted that “good people were trying to do good work”. She agreed with this (she had to) and added the over-emphasis on financial concerns (for good measure). “I’ve hated some of the language” she said, “which has swirled around the Inquiry”, for example, “holding the line”. “Was the group-think apparent to you at the time?” she was asked. The witness paused for longer than was comfortable in silence, then with her hand held securely to her chin, she talked earnestly (?) about all the good things they (the new Scottish Executive) achieved, the nature of the way things were at the time, how busy everyone was, and yes, the death of DD was rolled out. She did admit to the loss of connection to people and issues as things became part of the ongoing process of the way Government was done. (Such as the “us” of Government were naturally minded to oppose the “them” of the Haemophilia Society, for example.) The Chair asked if the quotes in the press release were her words. She jabbered another answer about preferring to speak in person rather than on paper. (But wait, is not this the person who loves to be seen as an academic, albeit in a classically woke subject, and do they not write papers and author books, and expect their students to write answers to justify getting fancy certificates? With respect, Ms Deacon, that’s rubbish.)
Sir Brian highlighted a comment in the report which appeared to be at odds with the press release. She had to admit the whole thing was probably put in front of her and she signed it. She expressed regret at the drafting and would want to change how things came out if she had the chance to go back (... we bet you would now that you are being found out). She agreed it was written as too defensive and was not wholly inaccurate. So, once and for all that was the investigation report thoroughly rubbished by the person who commissioned it and signed it off. No wonder people walked out during her evidence. (Yes, they really did walk out on her.)
Comments
Post a Comment