THE head of the Scottish health service put pressure on the country's independent watchdog to water down a report on problems with patient waiting times, the Sunday Herald can reveal.
NHS chief executive Derek Feeley pushed Audit Scotland to drop a key phrase which suggested a huge rise in patients classed as unavailable for operations had "disguised" the inability of health boards to meet waiting-list targets.
After Feeley complained about parts of the draft report, Audit Scotland also cut references to official waiting-time figures being incomplete, and "unusual patterns" in waiting-list data.
Feeley, NHS Scotland's chief executive since November 2010, even accused the watchdog of "demonising" the "social unavailability" codes at the heart of the row over waiting times, and demanded that positive statements be inserted in the final report to make it more "balanced".
The waiting-times issue is hugely important to the SNP, as Independence Minister Nicola Sturgeon was Health Secretary in the period examined by Audit Scotland, and any problems would be used by her opponents in the referendum debate.
Social unavailability codes are given to patients who cannot have an operation for non-medical reasons, such as work commitments or going on holiday. This pauses the clock on the patients' guarantee of treatment within 18 weeks of referral to a hospital, and the clock restarts when patients become available again for their operation.
In mid-2008, when the codes came into effect, around 11% of patients received them, but three years later this had almost tripled to 31%.
The surge fuelled suspicions that NHS boards were wrongly marking patients as socially unavailable in order to get them off their books and hit their targets, because fewer patients makes it easier to treat the remaining ones on time.
After it emerged in 2011 that NHS Lothian had indeed been manipulating waiting codes to hit targets, their use mysteriously fell across most of Scotland's other NHS boards, adding to the impression codes had been abused. The misconduct at NHS Lothian and the rise in the codes elsewhere prompted Audit Scotland to undertake one of its most exhaustive inquiries, reviewing around 270,000 patient records.
In its report last month, the auditor said public trust had been put at risk, inadequate NHS records meant it was not possible to say if abuse was widespread, and there was not enough scrutiny of what was happening to patients.
It flagged up unexplained code hotspots – such as 70% of patients at a Glasgow orthopaedic unit apparently being unavailable for social reasons – twice the national average – and the use of the codes leading to under-reporting of patients waiting more than nine weeks for operations.
Using Freedom of Information, the Sunday Herald has now obtained the more damning draft report, and Feeley's comments on it as part of the standard pre-publication clearance process.
On January 29, Feeley wrote to Auditor General Caroline Gardner to flag "six key issues in the draft report which we believe need alteration".
He asked for "greater balance" after Audit Scotland said it could give "no assurance" that manipulation was not widespread. He also asked for a rewrite of the "very strong allegation" that codes had "disguised" failure, and repeatedly objected to any reference to "unusual patterns" in the waiting list data. Audit Scotland agreed to most of the changes.
However, on February 11, Feeley wrote again about "errors of omission", asking for "helpful" points to be added, such as a statement that no deliberate manipulation had been proved, and waiting times were generally falling.
He also complained "about what I can only describe as the 'demonising' of social unavailability in the report", resulting in Audit Scotland's final report stressing the codes had a positive function if used properly.
Labour health spokeswoman Jackie Baillie said: "These revelations take the scandal of NHS waiting times and cover-up to a whole new level.
"This original draft is even more damning for the SNP Government than the one published. No wonder those involved were so desperate to try to tone it down. These targets were put in place so Scottish patients could get the best possible treatment but it appears Nicola Sturgeon and [current Health Secretary] Alex Neil were prepared to collude with NHS bosses to cover up these failings rather than get it right for people."
Scottish LibDem health spokesman Jim Hume added: "This exposes the extremes to which ministers will go to avoid criticism. Patients want lessons learned from this scandal. They don't want Government ministers and their appointed chiefs airbrushing the problems away."
Mary Scanlon, Tory deputy of Holyrood's public audit committee, which recently quizzed Feeley about waiting times, said the material raised new questions, and accused SNP MSPs of trying to "close down any potential criticism that might be levelled at the SNP Government".
The Government stressed Audit Scotland made the final decision on what appears in its reports. A spokeswoman said: "In line with standard procedure, Audit Scotland asked us for comments on the draft report. In the interest of accuracy, Audit Scotland accepted a number of our points and amended the final report accordingly, in exactly the same way as has been done on many other occasions. As the Auditor General has made clear, Audit Scotland found no evidence of dishonest manipulation of waiting times."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article