Concern health staff do not understand the implications of their views entering the public arena was behind a decision to withhold their details, the Southern District Health Board says.
The health board withheld identifying details of submitters to two restructuring proposals last year, regardless of whether they requested anonymity.
Staff are advised that if they do not request anonymity, their submission could be released under the Official Information Act.
The decisions to withhold them all prompted the Otago Daily Times to complain to the Office of the Ombudsman, and as part of that process, the health board's communications director, Steve Addison, has written to the newspaper explaining the board's decision.
He said the board could have made the situation clearer to staff on the consultation forms, and to the ODT in initial explanations of why it was withholding the details.
However, the board was sticking by its decision.
''We consider that Southern DHB should have reframed the statement on the front of the document calling for submissions because we believe that many staff do not understand the full implications of their submissions being released within the public arena.
''State servants are required to be politically neutral when exercising their functions, so conversely, state servants are entitled to be protected from being drawn into the public domain from the type of public scrutiny you are seeking via your OIA request for information.''
The two restructuring proposals sought views on rearranging the executive, senior management, and merging Otago and Southland clinical departments.
