Minister accused of “spin” over osteopath case

Monday 18 February 2019

The Health Minister has been accused of "spin" over his response to findings that the Health Department mistreated a local osteopath, which was dubbed an attempt “to disguise, and even justify, what was a critical failure”.

The comments were this morning issued by the States Complaints Board (SCB) - an independent body tasked with investigating public grievances with government departments.

Led by Geoffrey Crill, the panel hit back at the Health Minister Deputy Richard Renouf’s response to their finding that Mr Badrul Huda was maligned by Health and Social Services in a fierce critique of what they termed an attempt to “spin” the department’s wrongdoing.

Calling for greater accountability from Deputy Renouf, the SCB express their dissatisfaction at the Minister’s response to their findings that “the actions of the department [were] unjust and contrary to natural justice".

This cross-fire has emerged over a case concerning a local osteopath whom the Health Department felt had failed to act responsibly in his treatment of a vulnerable patient, but the allegations were thrown out by the General Osteopathic Council (GOC) who found there was no case to answer. 

Pictured: The patient's allegations were referred to Mr Huda's professional body, the General Osteopathic Council.

However, Mr Huda later brought a grievance to the SCB, arguing that his 42-year career was nearly left in tatters by the way the department and the Medical Officer for Health Dr Susan Turnbull handled his former patient’s claims. 

The heart of Mr Huda’s complaint was that the department did not notify him before they made a referral to his professional body of the GOC, meaning that, from his perspective, the allegations of his former patient were given more credence than his account. 

Upholding his complaint, the Board then found that Mr Huda was indeed treated in an “unjust, oppressive or improperly discriminatory” manner by the department – a finding that the Health Minister said he was “disappointed” by in his official response to the SCB report. 

The Board has now published their reaction to the Minister’s response, expressing equal disappointment, in a stinging indictment of what they deem to be “spin” as well as suggesting that this is not the first time a Minister has sought to soften the blow of the Board’s findings.

The SCB response reads: “The Board… is disappointed – although not surprised – that a Minister has once again sought to ‘spin’ his response in a manner that seeks to disguise, and even justify, what was a critical failure by the department to follow its own written procedures.  

Pictured: Health Minister Deputy Richard Renouf has been accused of "spin" over his comments regarding the osteopath's grievance.

“It was a failure which rendered the actions of the department unjust and contrary to natural justice.”

The Board make the point that, in his response, Deputy Renouf “seeks to pass this failure off as a ‘procedural error’”, but they say it is rather “a failure… to observe and conform to a non-discretionary principle of its own procedure, which deprived Mr Huda of the basic right to be made aware of accusations made against him.”

Although the Minister’s response attempts to defend his department’s decision to refer the allegations to the GOC in the first place, the Board counter this by explaining that “nowhere in its findings has the Board suggested that the referral to the GOC was inappropriate in this case. That decision was always a matter for the Adult Safeguarding Team.” 

The Board’s response continues: “The Board reiterates that the procedure in making such a referral should have been followed, but was not, and as a consequence Mr Huda was denied natural justice.” 

Pictured: The Health Department has come under fire from the Complaints Board's response.

The Board also disagreed with the Minister’s argument that the referral to the GOC, which triggered a “safeguarding investigation” which “…is not (nor does it purport to be) a disciplinary or regulatory investigation.”

For the SCB, “the decision to refer the matter was itself a disciplinary process”.

Elsewhere in their response, the Board deemed an aspect of the Minister’s comments which say that the Adult Safeguarding team have no authority to discipline health professionals as “somewhat disingenuous, a directly contradicting what the Director” of Community Care and Health Chris Dunne told the Board at Mr Huda’s original hearing. 

Bringing their response to a close, the Board emphasises that the mishandling of this case was not only “unjust” towards Mr Huda himself, but given the department’s “concerns” about the osteopath’s practice, “it was incumbent on the department to ensure that the referral contained all relevant information. The Medical Officer for Health acknowledged that this had not been the case.

“It could therefore be argued that the department had failed to address the public health risk that it perceived to exist as full as it should have done,” the Board concludes.