Re: Should we see the whole RCVS report, warts an' all

Hannah Wynne Richards — Fri, 23 Dec 2011 18:10:43 GMT

Clive I can think of two reasons for delaying publication I don't know the reasons-am as much in the dark as the rest of you but the following scenarios are plausible

Firstly There may be bribery involved in the award of the contracts In that case there could be criminal prosecutions pending I don't know if you have ever been one of the prosecution team ? I have lots of times, and it's essential not to throw the case by discussing in public, before you tell the story before magistrates/jury-also of course-no matter how conclusive the evidence-no one is guilty until the magistartes/jury have said so

Secondly, there may not be actual crime involved, but employees have exceeded their remits, and disciplinary proceedings were mooted-and the employees concerned have jumped before they were pushed Again there's this legal business of innocent until proven guilty It's impossible to discipline an employee who's already left, and again without the formal hearing they have legally done nothing wrong, so public accusations could result in them being awarded substantial damages Crazy I know,but that's the law

I'm as sick about the overspend as the rest of you, but sufficiently legally aware not to make the mistake of being too vociferous too soosoftly softly catchee monkey

Wynne

Re: Should we see the whole RCVS report, warts an' all

patrick murphy — Fri, 23 Dec 2011 12:57:15 GMT

yes

Re: Should we see the whole RCVS report, warts an' all

Clive Ansell — Fri, 23 Dec 2011 11:04:26 GMT

Why in due course? should it not be a case of should we see the report as it is - yes or no?

Re: Should we see the whole RCVS report, warts an' all

Hannah Wynne Richards — Fri, 23 Dec 2011 10:30:33 GMT

What about "Yes, in due course "

Wynne

Re: Should we see the whole RCVS report, warts an' all

Mark Hedberg — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 21:16:57 GMT

Yes.