By FRANCESCA MOLD
Women caught up in Gisborne's cervical cancer scandal want health officials responsible for mistakes named.
Concern has continued to grow that the Ministry of Health escaped too lightly in the findings of the cancer inquiry report released on Tuesday.
Gisborne woman Wendy Ure said the report should have identified those responsible for the programme's failures.
Karen Middleton, who has been diagnosed with terminal cancer, said those in charge should be made to face up to the consequences of their action. She was angry at the response of health bureaucrats at Tuesday's public meeting in Gisborne.
A long-time women's health advocate, Alliance MP Phillida Bunkle, said the cervical screening programme was set up to fail by the ministry because the idea was initiated by "community voices" rather than bureaucrats.
The report criticised health officials for a host of failings, ranging from ignoring expert advice to not ensuring there was quality control, performance standards or an evaluation of the national screening programme's performance.
It said these failings had allowed Dr Michael Bottrill's misreading of thousands of cervical smears to go undetected.
But the report did not identify the officials responsible for the mistakes.
This has angered many of the women caught up in the scandal.
"Women are looking for acknowledgment from the people who made the mistakes, that they made them," said Ms Bunkle. "We've actually had a huge amount of buck-passing. The women are saying when is the buck-passing going to stop."
Health Minister Annette King and her officials stuck closely to the line that the programme had improved dramatically, they had learned lessons from the inquiry and it was now time to concentrate on the future.
The ministry has apologised to the women and acknowledged they felt let down by the health system, but staff were not prepared to discuss the individuals responsible or issues of blame.
This attitude has been interpreted by the women as an attempt to squirm out of accepting responsibility and avoid the call for heads to roll.
However, the attempt to openly discuss plans for the programme and consult women about improvements is a significant step forward from the defensive, guarded attitude of ministry witnesses during the 12-week inquiry last year.
One witness, Judy Glackin, took five days to give evidence. Her long-winded explanations and refusal to give her opinion frustrated even panel chairwoman Ailsa Duffy, QC, who several times had to instruct her to answer questions with a yes or no.
A ministry official who did speak freely, Dr Bob Boyd, came under pressure from politicians and bureaucrats for his outspokenness.
Ms Duffy reacted by expressing concern that witnesses should not face "adverse consequences" because they had been forthcoming at the inquiry.
Former Health Minister and National MP Wyatt Creech said that like most reports the inquiry put problems down to a systemic failure.
"The findings are so general and nebulous that nobody gets the blame for failing to perform," he said.
"It's hard to believe that no one did anything wrong, that shouldn't be more directly addressed."