HEALTH bosses have offered important concessions to campaigners pressing for a public inquiry into the Richard Neale affair.

The group, which represents victims of the former North Yorkshire surgeon, said its members were dismayed when the Department of Health announced earlier this year that it intended to hold an NHS inquiry behind closed doors.

They were also unhappy the inquiry was to be chaired by a senior NHS doctor.

But, following a recent meeting with officials in London, the department has offered a modified form of private inquiry.

The most important concession is that the inquiry would be chaired by a senior barrister or "other demonstrably independent person".

However, the move may not be enough to persuade campaigners to call off plans to seek a judicial review in the High Court, next month, to force the Government to hold a public inquiry.

Mr Neale was struck off by the General Medical Council (GMC) last year for botching operations and lying to patients. He had already been struck off in Canada after a patient died.

Apart from the role of the GMC in failing to act on information supplied to it in the mid-1980s, campaigners are angry at the part played in the Neale affair by the Friarage Hospital, in Northallerton.

The trust continued to support the controversial consultant in the face of increasing number of complaints from patients, and then gave him a favourable reference and a £100,000 golden handshake as a way of getting rid of him.

Graham Maloney, spokes-man for the patient group, said: "This is a major step forward. We will have to wait until we see the full terms of reference on offer but it certainly deserves our full consideration."

There were still major reservations about what was on offer, said Mr Maloney.

"They have obviously taken advice and our comments on the lack of independence have been proved right but the exclusion of the Press is going to be a problem for us to accept," he said.

Without the involvement of The Northern Echo in the early stages of the Neale affair, Mr Maloney said he doubted whether the group would have got anywhere.

He is also concerned that the surgeon's private patients cannot give evidence.