The College first became aware that confidential information had been leaked earlier this year after the Veterinary Record made the decision to publish details.
The College says it then provided a number of informal opportunities for the person leaking the information to come forward and discuss the reasons for their actions, but nobody stepped forward.
A Council member then made a formal complaint about the leak, which triggered the complaints policy set out in the College’s Code of Conduct for Council Members and instigated the investigation.
The investigation was run independently of the RCVS by an external specialist consultancy, and coordinated by a legal assessor.
Initially, the investigators were asked to focus on a single leak, but following a number of further leaks over ensuing months, it became necessary to widen the scope and depth of the investigation.
The investigators’ report concluded that there had been several separate and deliberate leaks of confidential information by a current or former Council member over an extended period.
However, they were not able to identify who specifically was responsible for the leaks, and because nobody admitted it, no further action under the complaints policy of the Code of Conduct for Council Members was appropriate.
The investigators concluded that the leaks were not the result of poor understanding of College or Council processes, but a deliberate decision to provide confidential information to third parties.
Council members have therefore agreed to review existing training requirements and mechanisms for handling confidential information and to explore in more detail the potential motivation of the person or people who leaked the information, together with the underlying culture of Council that might have influenced their behaviour.
RCVS President Mandisa Greene, said: “There is no denying this is a sad day for the College, and for RCVS Council in particular. As Council members of our professions’ regulatory body, we must maintain the very highest standards of probity and integrity if we are to maintain the trust and confidence of our professional colleagues. In the same way, we must subject ourselves to the same level of scrutiny and investigation if these values and behaviours are ever called into question.
“That someone chose to breach the trust placed in them by their peers is extremely disappointing, especially when they were given every opportunity to come forward to discuss their concerns, and avoid the College having to launch a formal investigation.
"Our default position during Council meetings is to hold as many discussions as possible in public session to ensure Council’s decisions are as open and transparent as possible – something that we will continue to increase as much as possible. Like any organisation, however, there may be a small number of issues that need to be discussed in closed session – for example, those still at concept stage prior to any decision being made public or put out for consultation, or those containing personal or commercially sensitive data.
"I sincerely hope that all of us on Council can learn from this unfortunate and unnecessary episode. We must rebuild and maintain sufficient confidence in each other, and in our processes, that, even if we disagree on certain matters, it is always best to do so in a direct, upfront and honest manner."
PS: Whilst you're here, take a moment to see our latest job opportunities for vets.
It is not just about confidentiality but about mutual trust. The only solution is sack them all and start again.
So I understand from this that council will now keep minutes of meetings secret from themselves, as well as us the profession that they are elected to represent, in an effort to stop us finding out what they are talking about.
The President in typical fashion misses the point:
"There is no denying this is a sad day for the College, and for RCVS Council in particular. As Council members of our professions’ regulatory body, we must maintain the very highest standards of probity and integrity if we are to maintain the trust and confidence of our professional colleagues"
So she things the main issue is that the whistle blower wasn't upholding the "integrity"of council by sharing information with us, that sounds like a very Trumpian view on whistle blowers.
I presume that the cost of the failed investigation will also be kept secret, perhaps written up as stationary in college accounts.
Moving beyond obvious sarcasm, if council wish us members to see them as having integrity they must first follow Nolan principles and cease secret meetings. The only council member or members with true integrity in my opinion are the anonymous moles.
To be slightly glib: perhaps it wasn’t a mole, but a bug