Health minister faces vote of confidence

She has faced calls to resign amid claims of government inference in an independent study about changes to NHS reforms.

Opposition parties point to an exchange of emails between officials and the report’s author prior to its publication as proof of it being “sexed up”.

Mrs Griffiths has strongly rejected such claims, as has the man behind the dossier, Professor Marcus Longley. Both have stressed that the Case For Change document was done without bias or influence.

However, the British Medical Association has said the report can no longer be viewed as truly independent.

Today opposition parties in the Assembly announced they had agreed to table a joint motion together.

A statement from the three parties said: “The Welsh Conservatives, Plaid Cymru and the Welsh Liberal Democrats have agreed to table a motion of no confidence in the Labour health minister, Lesley Griffiths, following the controversy surrounding the independence of the Case for Change report.

“The Welsh Conservative, Plaid Cymru and Welsh Liberal Democrat shadow health ministers will urge the health and social care committee on Thursday to call on the health minister, her officials and Professor Longley to answer questions before the committee next Wednesday morning.”

All seven local health boards (LHBs) in Wales are in the final stages of preparing plans for a major reconfiguration of their services, which have been described as “highly controversial”.

One of the cornerstones of the government’s justification for changes were documented in the Case for Change report.

Since then a string of emails have emerged detailing correspondence between Prof Longley and NHS Wales medical director Chris Jones, who is also a senior Welsh government civil servant.

In one email, Dr Jones asked Prof Longley to make his report “more positive if possible” by describing “a persuasive vision of how things could be better”.

Opposition parties say the exchange of emails brings into question the independence and ultimately the authenticity of the report’s findings.