Former Eljamel patient’s ‘shock’ at health board’s approach to inquiry

A former patient of disgraced neurosurgeon Sam Eljamel has expressed her “shock” at NHS Tayside’s approach to an inquiry into his wrongdoing, after a former executive at the health board was unable to answer questions.

Sandra MacLeod, who was interim deputy chief executive for NHS Tayside from February 2024 to February 2026, had been lined up to answer a number of questions about records management at the health board.

However on Thursday evening, the health board notified the inquiry that many of those questions should have been directed to Margaret Dunning – who gave her evidence last week.

Reporting this to chair Lord Weir, counsel to the inquiry Jamie Dawson KC said this was “difficult to understand”, since it contradicted what the inquiry was told last week about who those questions should be directed to.

Mr Dawson told the inquiry: “The information that we now have is that certain of those questions, it would appear, should have been posed to Margaret Dunning when she gave evidence last week, in particular questions 103 to 105.”

He continued: “We’re told that (Ms MacLeod) is able to answer questions in relation to health records, but that any data protection or freedom of information aspect of the response would fall under information governance, which at the relevant time would have fallen under Margaret Dunning.

“Now that that’s difficult to understand in the context of having been told that Ms Dunning did not, in fact, answer certain questions last week.

The inquiry is being chaired by Lord Weir. PA Media

“For example, question 104, which is to do with the accuracy of medical records, which we were told that she did not speak to.”

He said the episode had left the inquiry in “a degree of confusion”, but stressed that “further investigations” would be made to fill in any gaps in the evidence heard.

During questioning, Ms MacLeod read frequently from written notes, and at one point it emerged the parts of the inquiry statement for which she was responsible had been written by other people.

When challenged on this, she told the inquiry: “My role was (one of) executive oversight, this was pulled together from the subject matter experts who felt that those were the relevant documents.”

Mr Dawson pressed her: “So, all of the answers that you gave were written by someone else?”

She replied in the affirmative, but said she had signed them off in her executive role.

The witness also explained that the decisions about who was put forward to answer questions about which area had been made by a group that included, among others, NHS Tayside executive medical director Dr James Cotton, who appeared before the inquiry earlier this week.

Mr Dawson put it to her: “So can we deduce from that that it appears that it was Dr Cotton, along with the other people on the committee, who took the decision that it would be best for not the person who answered these questions, but for someone who didn’t answer these questions, to come before the inquiry about these important matters today.”

Ms MacLeod responded: “That would be a reasonable assumption, (but) I don’t have the facts in front of me.”

Speaking afterwards, former patient Gillian Davidson – who was present at the hearing – told the Press Association she felt “utter shock”.

She said: “I’m just so shocked. The NHS Tayside representatives have all come to this so totally unprepared, all of them.

“But this afternoon was the worst. In in her defence, she seems to have been sent to talk about stuff she didn’t know.

“But why would you send someone like that to something as important as this?”

She said her reaction was shared by other former patients who were in the room during the hearing.

“We were all kind of looking each other and thinking, ‘what on earth?’

“My hope is, and I think this might happen, that these people will be brought back and have to answer these questions themselves because it seems like they’re hiding.”

Ms Davidson added: “To me, they didn’t seem to grasp the seriousness of what this is all about, and it is very serious because we do not want this to happen again.”

A spokesperson for NHS Tayside said, “As The Eljamel Inquiry is ongoing, it would not be appropriate to comment on evidence being considered as part of its proceedings.

“We will continue to assist the Inquiry constructively and respectfully.”

The inquiry, before Lord Weir, continues.