A review of the Care Quality Commission (CQC) response to complaints about the Furness General Hospital deaths found a manager may have ordered the deletion of a report critical of the regulator.

The individual denies the allegations.

CQC chief executive David Behan said it was reviewing legal advice not to reveal the names of those involved.

He said the CQC would now see if they could be "put into the public domain".

It follows growing pressure to publicly name those involved.

More than 30 families have taken legal action against the hospital in relation to baby and maternal deaths and injuries from 2008.

Officials alleged to have been involved in an NHS regulator's cover-up of failures over deaths of babies at a Cumbria hospital have been identified.

The Care Quality Commission has named former chief executive Cynthia Bower, her deputy Jill Finney and media manager Anna Jefferson.

They were all said to be present at a meeting where deletion of a critical report was allegedly discussed.

Initially all three were not named when the claims surfaced on Wednesday.

But the CQC was forced into a U-turn amid mounting pressure from ministers and the information commissioner.

The allegations of a cover-up emerged in a report produced by consultants Grant Thornton.

It was commissioned by the CQC after a new leadership team was appointed last summer.

You fetch the farm tools, I'll grab the burning torches.

The CQC claimed it could it not disclose the identities of those who ordered the destruction of a report which highlighted failings by the watchdog

Understandable, but leave it to the lawyers.

If I remember rightly, it was the CQC that did the cover up. They are the "regulators" of the NHS.



Of the two names I'm aware of, one was involved with Stafford Hospital at the time of the scandal occurring, and the other is involved in ensuring whistleblowers are safe. What's the point in whistleblowing if nothing happens except cover ups?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-23021098

That sort of thing is why I never totally dismiss conspiracies - you'll cover each other's backs if just one of you can bring down the whole show. You don't have to like each other. Equally, given a way out you might bring the whole show down to be done with it.

I do not think that this was an intentional conspiracy. It sort of developed. Those involved realised that their careers would disappear down the drain if this was to become exposed. It is more of a mutual coverup rather than a grand conspiracy.

Whatever it is, it's still wrong. The thing that worries me is that this regulator has the power to shut down GP surgeries it they're not up to scratch and making so much bureacracy that we're having to see fewer patients just so we can cope. As an example, we have to have a "dog poo protocol" - ie something that states what happens if there's dog poo about. Apparently "just clean it up" isn't enough of a protocol. We have to get rid of our comfy chairs for patients as they're not "wipe clean-able" so we're going to have to switch to hard plastic chairs. All this from the genius minds that were involved in that cover up.

I was more suggesting what's going to happen anyway. You can bet that the second the names were revealed, tabloid journalists were digging through their bins, both literally and figuratively.