SA Health’s ‘no comment’ on claims staff at SA Pathology have been suspended

SA Health is neither confirming nor denying bombshell whistleblower claims about one of its key agencies, issuing a terse “no comment.”

SA Health is refusing to comment on bombshell claims by a whistleblower key staff at SA Pathology have been suspended.

It is alleged an internal investigation is underway and also a separate independent external investigation is being held.

The Advertiser repeatedly sought information from SA Health and Health Minister Chris Picton on the issue but these questions have been rebuffed.

Questions asking if any senior staff at the agency have been suspended, and if so how many and for how long, the reason for the suspension and if there is an internal or external investigation underway, were met with a one line written statement which neither confirmed nor denied the claim.

A pathology lab assistant at work. Picture: Thinkstock

“We are unable to comment on matters relating to employment of individuals,” it states.

SA Health has previously commented on matters relating to employment of individuals.

SA Pathology has had a turbulent history in recent years.

It faced privatisation over long-running inefficiencies and the threat of more than 300 sackings but was saved by cost cutting and also by the arrival of the pandemic when demand for pathology services soared.

In 2016 its chief executive Ken Barr was sacked over a bungle revealed by the Sunday Mail when more than 100 men were given false positive results for prostate cancer, leaving them thinking they had cancer – including men who had already had their prostate removed.

In a written submission to a parliamentary committee Mr Barr later claimed a culture of “fear and blame” pervaded the public health sector in SA.

In 2014 SA Pathology officials admitted they installed spy cameras to secretly monitor staff, which came to light when a whistleblower told then-opposition leader Steven Marshall.

SA Pathology said the covert surveillance devices were justified to investigate delays in processing patient results.

The cameras were disguised in smoke detectors and when staff became suspicious, they were told the devices were air conditioner thermostats.

An internal investigation ruled it was inappropriate but not illegal.