The Independent on Sunday has got a bee in its bonnet on whistle-blowing and has run a number of stories on various individuals over recent months. They are running a piece tomorrow on JW. The reporter is Nina Lakhani, she’s done the other whistle-blowing stories and has told JW that having read his judgment it is the most clear cut finding on whistle-blowing that she has seen.

She approached Lansley for comment and got a statement saying he has ordered Nicholson to conduct an inquiry. (This is somewhat amusing when you think that Carruthers is Nicholson’s mentor – tho’ maybe Lansley is being really clever and passing the poisoned chalice to Nicholson: it’s said that Lansley wants rid of Nicholson and the culture he has engendered.)

She also approached both RCHT and the SHA with one question each. She asked the former for the real reason why JW was sacked (since the tribunal clearly didn’t believe what they had put forward during the 13 days of hearing) and asked the latter why, if RCHT was so capable of making its own decisions as the SHA continually asserts, the SHA had found it necessary to bully RCHT into suspending JW (as the tribunal concluded). Both responded by asking her to submit their question by e-mail so they could consider their answer