
EXCLUSIVE Now Auditor General stands ready to probe NHS Fife chiefs over their handling of trans battle
In an exclusive interview, Stephen Boyle refused to rule out taking a deep-dive into the health board's finances and governance structures.
It comes as Scottish Conservative leader Russell Findlay last night demanded First Minister John Swinney 'sack' NHS Fife's CEO and board if they did not 'do the right thing and quit'.
Sandie Peggie, 51, was suspended from her role at Victoria Hospital, in Kirkcaldy, last year after she objected to 30-year-old male-born Dr Beth Upton using the female facilities.
She is also suing the Royal College of Nursing union, a fact first revealed by MailOnline in May.
Last night, Mr Boyle - who assesses public bodies' value for money as well as their governance structures and accountability - said he would make a decision on whether to probe NHS Fife after his auditors complete their usual reports.
Asked about the use of taxpayer funds to pay for legal costs relating to the tribunal so far, Mr Boyle said he understood why the public might be concerned over the spending.
He said: 'Without commenting on the specifics of the case... I understand across the piece why the public will want to be satisfied absolutely that public money is spent properly consistent with the roles and responsibility of public bodies who are tasked with implementing government policy.'
Probed over whether he had concerns NHS Fife might not be complying with the law on single sex spaces - clarified by a Supreme Court ruling that a woman is defined by her biological sex in April - he said he would await the auditor's usual report of the health board.
He said: 'How I discharge my responsibilities, particularly when it comes to individual public bodies, is through the annual auditors. I appoint auditors for all public bodies, with the exception of local government and they'll conduct an audit of the expenditure.
'In public sector context, we don't just look at the numbers, we also look at governance, accountability and value for money, and I'll await the auditor's report.
'That's something that they will refer to, and it's something that I can then take a decision, as I do in many cases, whether to proceed with a statutory report to the Scottish Parliament on the back of that.'
And pushed on whether he will investigate NHS Fife's handling of the case, he said: 'It's not something I have made a decision on yet. I will await the auditor's report.'
Mr Boyle's comments come after Scottish Tory leader Mr Findlay yesterday said the tribunal was unfolding like an 'ongoing slow-motion car crash'.
He said NHS Fife's chief executive Carol Potter, who earns at least £147,700 a year, and her 'entire board can no longer remain in post'.
And he condemned a media statement released by the health board on Friday evening which took a swipe at human rights organisation Sex Matters, which is supporting Mrs Peggie.
The statement read: 'Sex Matters have been very active, making statements which it would appear are aimed at steering public opinion in a way that NHS Fife as a public body clearly cannot.'
It added: 'There has been significant and very polarised debate on social media regarding the case and associated issues, throughout. In some cases, however, what began as debate has evolved into much more worrying behaviour, including a threat of physical harm and sexual violence, which has required the involvement of Police Scotland.'
NHS Fife later tweaked the release, adding: 'NHS Fife is not seeking to suggest that anyone involved with Sex Matters have contributed to the behaviour or issues mentioned above.'
However the move backfired spectacularly, drawing criticism and ridicule in equal measure.
Last night, Mr Findlay said: 'In their zeal to embrace the SNP's bonkers belief in gender ideology, they were willing to destroy the career of a nurse and waste huge sums of taxpayers' money.
'But instead of taking any responsibility for their own conduct, they've now resorted to smearing Sandie Peggie and the campaigners who have stood with her.'
He added: 'John Swinney, Neil Grey and their SNP colleagues appear to be the only people left in Scotland who think this is okay.
'If the NHS Fife board won't do the right thing and quit, then they should be sacked.'
NHS Fife's statement also made reference to a freedom of information battled between the health board and The Mail.
However that also caused concern, and sparked a warning from the Scottish Information Commissioner David Hamilton who said it had cast doubt on its compliance with FOI legislation.
In May, he ordered NHS Fife to review what information it held about its legal bill for the tribunal after it failed to supply the costs to The Mail.
Earlier this month, NHS Fife published data saying the case had cost £220,500 as of the end of May - although that had soared to £258,831 by the end of June.
Mr Hamilton said: 'The petulant tone of NHS Fife's latest statement is quite remarkable, but it is the contents that concern me most. They have now cast doubt upon the assurances they gave me regarding compliance with my Decision Notice.'
If the authority had not complied, he said he may 'report the matter to the Court of Session as a contempt of court'.
According to the health board's communications policy, Press releases are approved by the 'relevant Executive Director and Chief Executive before release', meaning Mrs Potter was likely aware of the statement.
The tribunal battle between the veteran nurse, the health board and the doctor continues.
A Scottish Government spokesman said: 'Ministers have been clear they have confidence in the board. It would however be inappropriate to comment further while judicial proceedings in an Employment Tribunal are ongoing.'
A spokeswoman for NHS Fife said: 'To date, NHS Fife has had no contact from the Auditor General on this matter.'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Western Telegraph
43 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Report highlights ‘significant concerns' over hospital maternity services
More than 100 recommendations have been made to improve maternity care at Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust. The trust has apologised to families and said that a 'comprehensive improvement plan' is in place. One of the most damning areas of concern is issues that have blighted maternity services have been allowed to continue because of a lack of learning Rachelle Mahapatra, Irwin Mitchell A report by NHS England's Maternity Safety Support Programme highlights how maternity services in Leeds 'had a challenge in responding to families who have experienced harm and poor outcomes' which led to several families seeking an independent inquiry. It highlights a 'challenging' culture in the organisation. The report says learning from incidents was 'not robust' and describes how staff felt safety concerns were de-escalated without being resolved. Around 9,000 babies are born each year across St James University Hospital and Leeds General Infirmary, which are run by the trust. The trust is one of several which are being examined as part of a national review into NHS maternity care. The first part of the review will see experts investigate up to 10 of the most concerning maternity and neonatal units, including Leeds, with a view to give affected families answers as quickly as possible. A major NHS review of Leeds' maternity services has issued more than 100 recommendations for improvement. Our expert @RachelMcPatrick, who's helping families affected by maternity care failings in Leeds, says the report lays bare the scale of problems: — Irwin Mitchell (@irwinmitchell) July 28, 2025 The second will be a 'system-wide' look at maternity and neonatal care, uniting lessons from past maternity inquiries to create one clear set of actions designed to improve national NHS care. The investigation will report back before the end of the year. Law firm Irwin Mitchell said that it is representing a number of affected families, including parents whose babies have either died or been left with life-long disabilities or mothers who have been injured while giving birth. Medical negligence lawyer Rachelle Mahapatra, from the firm's Leeds office, said: 'This latest report yet again lays bare the scale of the problems within Leeds's maternity services. 'That more than 100 recommendations have been made will yet again cause concerns and upset among families, including those we continue to represent. 'One of the most damning areas of concern is issues that have blighted maternity services have been allowed to continue because of a lack of learning. I would like to apologise to all the families who have received maternity care with us which has fallen short of the high standard we aim to provide Rabina Tindale, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust 'It's imperative that when something goes wrong in the NHS, families are listened to, problems are analysed and reviewed – and any recommendations implemented to prevent the same mistakes happening time and time again.' Rabina Tindale, chief nurse at Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, said: 'This report has highlighted significant areas where we need to improve our maternity services, and my priority is to make sure we urgently take action to deliver the recommendations. 'I would like to apologise to all the families who have received maternity care with us which has fallen short of the high standard we aim to provide. 'It is vital that as a trust we listen more to our families and understand their experiences and concerns so we can address these and ensure everyone's experience is of the highest standard. 'We have already started making improvements to our services, and have a comprehensive improvement plan in place. 'Our commitment is to ensure every family feels safe, supported, and respected throughout their maternity journey with us.'


Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
Travel expert says popular products are a 'waste of money' - what not to buy
The travel experts at Which? have called out the travel health products that are a "waste of money" and have warned consumers against purchasing them ahead of a summer holiday While many of us enjoy making the most of the good weather next to a pool or beach, jetting off during the summer holidays often costs more than it would if you travelled off-peak. Whether it's sticking to hand luggage or bagging a last-minute flight for less than £20, many of us are also conscious of making our money go further when planning a summer holiday, but there are certain items you could be splashing cash on that simply aren't worthwhile. There are, however, some things you simply can't plan for, and that's falling ill while travelling. Investing in some mosquito repellent to ensure you don't spend the entire holiday scratching at them, or stockpiling on allergy medicines in local Boots might seem like an essential task to do before travelling, but it could be a waste of time and money depending on what you purchase. While many of us want to avoid getting sick on holiday, the travel gurus at Which? have revealed the travel health products that are actually a "waste of money", reports the Express. In a clip shared on Instagram, the travel specialists highlighted the popular items many of us buy to ensure we feel our best before jetting off, which aren't entirely essential and could be setting you back more than they're worth. Mosquito wristbands Remembering to reapply repellent can prove tricky whilst on holiday, which explains why numerous holidaymakers opt for wristbands as an alternative. Emitting a combination of components that deter the insects, Which? warned that they're not actually the most efficient. Whilst it may shield your wrist or at least the upper portion of your body, the specialists noted: "You're better off using a spray or lotion with 20% to 50% DEET on all exposed skin." Travel sickness bands If you're facing a lengthy car journey from the airport to your accommodation, or need to board a ferry, you might splash out on an anti-travel sickness band. A type of acupressure that's claimed to ease queasiness and nausea, the experts at Which? said: "The NHS says there's little scientific evidence that these work and when we put them to the test at a fairground, they didn't work either." Instead, they recommended buying tablets such as Kwells which contain hyoscine, a medication that prevents nausea signals. Once-a-day sunscreen Whilst once-a-day sunscreen may appear to be a perfect answer if you forget to reapply it, Which disclosed that they discovered a 74% reduction in protection throughout the day. It's safer for your skin to use sunscreen that you can reapply during the day, and you should top it up every two hours. Branded medicines Numerous branded medications are frequently pricier than generic alternatives available in supermarkets, despite containing identical ingredients. Which? recommended that whilst brands such as Piriteze and Clarityn might cost you £11, supermarket alternatives of the allergy treatment typically cost under half the price, and the same principle applies to Immodium. Search for the active component loperamide hydrochloride, and save cash by switching to an unbranded alternative.


Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
Model who said docs left her struggling to walk filmed 'strutting' at festival
Kae Burnell-Chambers claimed a blunder by NHS doctors led to nerve damage which left her struggling to walk, get out of a car or even dress herself, and she sued for millions An artist and model is facing jail over a "fraudulent" £3m NHS compensation claim after she was filmed parading in fantasy body paint at a festival despite claiming she needed a stick or wheelchair to get around. Kae Burnell-Chambers claimed a blunder by NHS doctors led to nerve damage which left her struggling to walk, get out of a car or even dress herself, and she sued for millions. But explosive video unveiled at the High Court instead showed the 44-year-old model and artist posing and strutting while painted as a fantasy warrior at the Kustom Culture Blast Off festival in 2019. The video was filmed months before she launched her multimillion pound damages bid over delayed diagnosis of her cauda equina syndrome - a condition involving damage to nerves at the end of the spinal cord. While the condition was genuine, she later admitted exaggerating her symptoms after social media videos emerged, revealing she had been working as a body-painting artist and parading as a model with no sign of having difficulty getting around. Ms Burnell-Chambers admitted she had "misrepresented" her symptoms during her claim. She is now facing a potential jail sentence after Judge Jonathan Glasson KC found her guilty of contempt of court. Cauda equina syndrome is a crippling condition which occurs when the bundle of nerves below the end of the spinal cord, known as the cauda equina, is damaged. Symptoms include low back pain, numbness and pain which radiates down the leg, but early diagnosis and treatment can lead to long term effects being much reduced. Sadie Crapper, barrister for Northern Lincolnshire and Goole NHS Foundation Trust, told the court that after NHS doctors missed early signs of the condition in 2016, Ms Burnell-Chambers, from Lincs, launched a bid for damages in 2019. She attended medico-legal appointments complaining of "a whole array of disabilities," saying she needed help to dress and to get out of the car. When she went to see a doctor had "displayed a laboured gait and used a stick," the barrister said. She went on to drop her claim in 2022 after social media videos and surveillance footage showed her claim was "fundamentally dishonest," said Ms Crapper. One of the videos was filmed the same morning she saw the medico-legal expert displaying high levels of disability, but the film showed her "at a petrol station with her mum walking with no problem". A core part of the NHS case was based on a series of social media videos showing her working as a bodypaint artist and model at a series of conventions and festivals around the UK. One particular video from the Kustom Kulture Blast Off in August 2019 "shows her having her body extensively painted and then parading in a show where she walks freely and dances without need for a walking aid," the barrister said. "By no later than 2017, she had recovered well enough to make a return to body painting. What you see in these videos is somebody who goes to conventions around the country. She's seen to walk without a mobility aid, crouch and converse about the work she's doing freely and without any sign of pain. "The person seen on the videos is markedly different from the person seen in the medico legal documents and her witness statement. She has at all times known she participated in these conventions, undertook this painting and modelling, and could walk as she did on the footage now available." She said it was the NHS Trust's case that Ms Burnell-Chambers had "fraudulently exaggerated her symptoms for the purposes of her clinical negligence claim". "[Ms Burnell-Chambers] now admits that she is in contempt of court and accepts that the custody threshold has been crossed in respect of her wrongdoing," she added. The court heard Ms Burnell-Chambers admitted her condition varies and her mobility is almost normal on good days, and that she had been exaggerating when she saw the medico legal expert doctor. "She admitted she had been fundamentally dishonest," but nevertheless has real "ongoing disabilities," her barrister Ben Bradley KC told the court. The judge, giving his ruling, said she had signed an admission that she had "deceived" the examining doctors "and deliberately changed my presentation", and that in doing so had "deliberately interfered with the administration of justice". In her admission statement, she said her mobility is near normal "on good days", but "on bad days" she considers herself to be disabled. When she saw some experts in the claim, she deliberately attempted to demonstrate what she perceived her function was at its worst, without telling the experts that was what she was doing. "I know it was wrong to misrepresent my presentation whilst making a civil claim. I accept that I deserve to be punished as a result," she added. At the end of a half-day hearing, the judge concluded: "I find the defendant guilty of contempt of court on the basis of her admissions." Ms Burnell-Chambers will now be sentenced in October. The maximum term for contempt of court is two years' imprisonment.