I have to duck out. These #bawagarba tweets have just swamped me, on top of usual traffic.
As a parting shot:
1 If you haven't read this SUI report, then you probably shouldn't defend her just yet.
2 If you have read it & you're still defending her? Hmmm..
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/460255/response/1128108/attach/html/2/FOI.SUI%20REPORT%20FOI%20Redacted.pdf.html …
Let me start with your last point first: Yes, it *is* GNM. Unless you're elevating your own opinion above that of the High Court, of course? And all w/o the benefit of access to the evidence presented to that court. Bear in mind her conviction is not being appealed. Only erasure.
-
-
And as far as the SUI report is concerned, the tune changes v quickly in the medical world. I remember a time when clinicians were complaining this report should be released believing it would highlight 'system' errors. Not so keen on it now they can see what it says. Funny that.
-
Who said it shouldn't be released? Name and shame them.
-
I don't know the answer to that. Trust management, presumably?
-
So not clinicians, but managers?
-
Yes. Did I word my first tweet badly, judging by your questions? Perhaps I'd have been better to say clinicians were calling for its release, rather than complaining it should be released? Or am I missing the point entirely?
-
That makes sense now.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.