By FRANCESCA MOLD
GISBORNE - Witnesses at the Gisborne cervical screening hearing may have come under pressure because their evidence was particularly outspoken, according to the inquiry's chairwoman.
Ailsa Duffy, QC, took the unusual step of reading a prepared statement on Thursday saying the panel would be concerned if a witness who had been "forthcoming" faced "adverse consequences" as a result.
She singled out the Ministry of Health chief adviser (safety and regulatory), Dr Bob Boyd, who had given evidence during the first week of the inquiry.
During his evidence, Dr Boyd answered questions from lawyers and the panel in a frank manner.
He discussed concerns that experts' recommendations about the structure of the cervical screening programme had been ignored by politicians, and said that nothing of what he had envisaged for the programme had been achieved.
The Herald understands that he has been heavily criticised by politicians and bureaucrats for his revealing answers.
Prime Minister Helen Clark, who was Health Minister in 1990, said last week that Dr Boyd's evidence had seriously misrepresented events during the early years of the programme.
On Monday, Health Funding Authority lawyer Kim Murray said news reports of Dr Boyd's evidence had attracted personal criticism of him. He asked the inquiry to be "sensitive" to the position witnesses were in.
When the Herald asked Dr Boyd what his reaction was to Ms Duffy's statement, he refused to comment.
The chairwoman's assertion that if witnesses became "reticent" about giving evidence it would only make the hearing "protracted" came after Ministry of Health senior official Judy Glackin ended a marathon five-day stretch in the witness box.
The timetable for the inquiry is very tight. Health Minister Annette King has made it clear she does not favour any extensions to the July 27 deadline and, with only six weeks of hearing time left, there are still about a dozen parties to give evidence, some with several witnesses.
During her evidence, Ms Glackin appeared to frustrate lawyers and panel members trying to cross- examine her with long-winded answers that seemed to skirt the issues being raised.
On a number of occasions, she refused to give her opinion and had to be asked several times by Ms Duffy to answer with a "yes" or "no."
The inquiry will reconvene on Wednesday with Dr Boyd back in the witness box for cross-examination.
Next up will be a Ministry of Health witness who will discuss issues related to Maori women. It is unlikely that evidence from medical experts, including epidemiologist Professor David Skegg, will be heard until next month.
Backlash alarms head of inquiry
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.
