I think it's important to understand that there is an ongoing process. The health board has appealed the decision for a full release of the report, as opposed to the summary that it's already provided, including the recommendations that have already been published. That's on the basis that the health board want to protect staff who raised concerns and contributed to the report.

If I can just take a step back from the individuals and think more generally about my former life, when, as an employment lawyer, I was looking at a variety of issues and thinking about the interests of our trade unions and the staff they represent, we all want a process where whistleblowers are listened to, their views are respected and action is taken seriously to investigate concerns they raise. To give people confidence that they could and should raise concerns, the culture of any organisation, including the particular workplace or workplaces people work in, is a hugely important part of that.

We know that some people are fearful that their complaints will lead to action being taken against them, but it's also the way that people are then identified on a wider basis as well. It is important that whistleblowers who want to raise complaints or concerns anonymously—those who want to contribute to reports but don't expect their names to be put into the public domain—have an opportunity to do that so we do genuinely learn from and understand what people are doing in their workplaces and the concerns that they have.

This is a balance. I don't think there is a hard-and-fast—that there is only one right or wrong answer, because I would not want to try to insist on a course of action that, actually, might prevent people coming forward in the future.