Written evidence submitted by the Parliamentary
and Health Service Ombudsman
INTRODUCTION
1. I welcome the opportunity to give evidence
to the Public Administration Select Committee on my 2009-10 Annual
Report, Making an impact, and also on other matters related
to the work of my Office. I last appeared before the Committee
to discuss the work of my Office generally in November 2009. This
Memorandum updates the Committee on some of our main activities,
includes a brief update on our casework performance at the half
year and looks ahead to the rest of this year.
CASEWORK PERFORMANCE
2. The details of our casework performance for
the business year 2009-10 are set out in my Annual Report.
3. 2009-10 was the first year in which we saw
the operation of the reforms to the NHS complaints system which
were introduced in April 2009 and which I had argued for for some
time. The reforms included the removal of the Healthcare Commission
as the second stage complaint handler, resulting in a substantial
increase in our workload and a much simpler system for health
complainants to use. We made careful preparations for these changes
and were well placed to deal with the increased numbers of enquiries
we received during this first year (24,000 against 16,000 in 2008-09).
4. During 2009-10 we saw significant increases
in incoming work, a noticeable increase in the number of complaints
resolved without the need for a full investigation and considerable
improvement (reduction) in the time taken for us to complete a
full investigation. These improvements all built on work in earlier
years to improve our productivity and the consistency and quality
of our work and were delivered during a year of considerable change.
5. At the end of the 2009-10 financial year we
were able to report that we had met five out of the six operational
targets for customer service that we had set, and we came very
close to meeting the sixth.
6. I am very pleased to be able to tell the Committee
that at the end of September 2010 we were meeting all six of our
customer service standards. Continuing to meet those standards
will be a challenge, but I am confident that we will be close
to them when the 2010-11 year end figures are available. I will
lay my Annual Report detailing our performance for 2010-11 before
Parliament in July 2011.
PARLIAMENTARY OMBUDSMAN—REPORT
UPDATES
Equitable Life
7. The Committee will remember that I appeared
before them on 14 October 2010 to give evidence following the
publication of Sir John Chadwick's proposals for payment of compensation
to Equitable Life Policyholders. At that time, the Government
had not responded to those proposals. On 20 October 2010 the Financial
Secretary to the Treasury made a statement in which he accepted
in full the findings in my report; and rejected Sir John's final
findings but adopted his calculations relating to relative loss
by policyholders. He further stated that the Independent Commission
on Equitable Life Payments had been told that a sum in the region
of £1.5 billion would be made available for payments to policyholders
and had been asked to advise Government on how such payments could
be calculated and prioritised.
8. On 16 December 2010 I wrote to the All-Party
Parliamentary Justice for Equitable Life Group clarifying my views
in light of the Government's announcements on Equitable Life made
on 20 October 2010. In the letter I recognised that whilst some
of the people who complained to me would be extremely disappointed
by the Government's decision on affordability and eligibility,
I could not say those decisions were incompatible with the recommendations
in my report.
9. As Parliamentary Ombudsman it had been my
task to report independently to Parliament on this matter so that
Parliament could be informed in the decisions that it took. Parliament
considered the issues raised in my report and the recommendations
I made and provided its response. I do not believe it would be
appropriate for me to comment on what Parliament has decided.
A copy of my letter to the All Party Parliamentary Group is attached
to this Memorandum (as Annex A).
Cold comfort
10. Some members of the Committee will remember
my report in December 2009, Cold comfort, which drew to Parliament's
attention the failure of Defra and the Rural Payments Agency to
accept or comply with all of my report's recommendations. I gave
evidence before the Committee on 28 January 2010, following which
the then Chair of the Committee wrote publicly to the relevant
Minister, asking him "personally to take another look at"
my report. On 15 February 2010 I met Dame Helen Ghosh, then Permanent
Secretary of Defra, and in March 2010 I received a letter from
her informing me that Defra had now accepted all of my recommendations.
11. I would like to take this opportunity to
say how much I appreciated the Committee's robust support on that
occasion. Most agencies and departments understand and respect
the unique constitutional position of the Ombudsman in terms of
the Office's independence and authority: my recommendations are
nearly always accepted and complied with. On the rare occasions
when my recommendations are not accepted, then the intervention
of the Committee has proved decisive in achieving justice for
citizens. I am grateful on their behalf and on behalf of my Office
for the rigour and vigour with which the Committee pursues such
issues.
12. Although the cases reported in Cold Comfort
are now closed, the Rural Payments Agency and the Single Payments
Scheme continue to feature heavily in our investigation caseload.
We expect to publish a further report in 2010-11.
Trawlermen's compensation scheme
13. In my evidence to the Committee in November
2009, I said that in July of that year the Department for Business,
Innovation and Skills had launched a new ex gratia compensation
scheme for former trawlermen. I thought this meant that the Department
were, finally, well on their way to full compliance with the recommendations
of my 2007 report, Put together in haste: "Cod wars"
trawlermen's compensation scheme. It is disappointing therefore
to have to tell the Committee that I have recently accepted for
investigation a number of complaints about the revised scheme.
PARLIAMENTARY OMBUDSMAN—OTHER
REPORTS
14. I have published two reports so far in the
current business year. The first was a report on my decision not
to uphold a complaint that the Pensions Regulator failed to exercise
its statutory functions properly and its discretion reasonably.
Since the start of that investigation I had received a further
ten complaints about the Regulator on these matters with referrals
from MPs from more than one Party. Putting this report in the
public domain enabled the outcome of my investigation of this
complaint to be seen openly. The second report was titled A Breach
of Confidence.
A Breach of Confidence
15. In January 2011 I published this report criticising
three government agencies for collectively failing to put things
right when a data sharing mistake led to a woman's personal and
financial information being wrongfully disclosed to her former
partner and her child support payments being reduced without her
knowledge. My focus here was less on the initial error than on
the complete failure of these three bodies to take responsibility
for their part in the error or to sort out the resulting confusion
and distress. I recommended that the three agencies, in discussion
with the Cabinet Office, agree a customer-focused protocol to
deal with complaints of this kind. I also took the significant
step of recommending that the Cabinet Office ensures that lessons
are learnt from the complainant's experience and that appropriate
guidance is disseminated to all government departments.
16. All the recommendations in my report have
been accepted.
HEALTH SERVICE
OMBUDSMAN REPORTS
Listening and Learning
17. In October 2010 I published the first of
my annual reports on the complaint handling performance of the
NHS in England. The report made clear that I think the NHS needs
to listen harder and learn more from complaints. When it fails
to do so, it is missing a rich source of insight and information
that comes directly from service users. We followed the publication
of this report with a series of regional conferences aimed at
supporting local NHS complaint handlers and others to improve
customer service and administration for the benefit of patients
and their families.
Care and Compassion?
18. The Committee may be interested to know that
I will be publishing a new report on the care of older people
by the NHS on 15 February 2011.
Using our evidence to support improvements in health
services
19. The Committee will wish to be aware that
I have submitted written evidence to the Health Select Committee's
Inquiry into Complaints and Litigation and I have been called
to give oral evidence on 15 February 2011.
20. I have also submitted written evidence to
the Public Inquiry into the operation of commissioning, supervisory
and regulatory bodies for Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust
(January 2005-March 2009) and expect to be called to give oral
evidence. During the period under investigation the NHS complaints
system included a second stage complaint handler, the Healthcare
Commission and we had very little direct contact with the Trust.
Nonetheless, I believe that we can make a useful contribution
to the Inquiry.
WIDER CONTACTS
21. We continue to share our experience and learning
with Ombudsmen from the UK and the international community on
a regular basis. In August 2010 my Office signed a Memorandum
of Understanding with the Public Protector of South Africa, Advocate
Thuli Madonsela. The purpose of the agreement is to provide a
framework for co-operation between the Public Protector of South
Africa and the UK Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman with
a view to sharing best practices and enhancing the effectiveness
of the two institutions. We have had a useful dialogue with the
British High Commissioner and her team in South Africa over the
importance of international support for the role that the Public
Protector plays in the South African constitution, and the strengthening
of bi-lateral contacts between our two countries.
LOOKING AHEAD
Major reports
22. In October 2011 I shall publish the second
Listening and Learning report on the complaint handling performance
of the NHS and a sister report (the first of its type) about the
complaint handling performance of government departments and agencies.
Resources
23. 2010-11 is the final year of PHSO's existing
three year funding settlement voted by Parliament. Starting in
September 2009, my Office undertook a detailed spending review
to determine the level of resourcing necessary to deliver our
statutory functions, in particular the core business of providing
a high quality complaint handling service direct to the public,
over the next four years. Our final submission proposed a settlement
which equated to a 12.7% reduction in funding over the four year
period to include:
— net
resource expenditure of £34.0 million for each of the four
years of the settlement period, a real terms reduction of 10.9%
by 201415; and
— capital
expenditure of £0.7 million per annum, a 67% reduction against
our 2010-11 settlement provision of £2.1 million.
24. HM Treasury has now sanctioned a four year
spending plan based on that submission and the funding will be
included in Estimates laid before Parliament in the summer. I
will publish a four year Strategic Plan alongside our Annual Report
in July.
Change
25. The Committee will be aware that I have announced
that I plan to retire from this role towards the end of 2011.
I hope that there will be further opportunities to discuss the
work of my Office before that time.
February 2011
Annex A
LETTER FROM OMBUDSMAN TO ALL PARTY PARLIAMENTARY
GROUP
Bob Blackman MP—Co-Chair
All-Party Parliamentary Justice for Equitable
Life Policyholders Group
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA
16 December 2010
I am writing in response to your letter of 1
November 2010. Please accept my apologies for not having
been able to reply sooner.
You ask me to clarify my views in light of the Government's
announcements on Equitable Life made on 20 October 2010, and subsequently.
You also ask me to address a number of specific questions. I will
do my best to provide the clarification you are seeking. However,
I do not think it would be appropriate or particularly helpful
to frame my response in accordance with your detailed questions.
Let me explain why.
From my perspective, the position is as follows:
— The
Government has made a clear and unequivocal statement that it
accepts all of my findings of maladministration and injustice.
— The
Government has established and funded a compensation scheme for
Equitable Life policyholders, to provide compensation for relative
loss, as my report recommended.
— The
Government has considered the potential impact on the public purse
of payment of compensation in this case, as my report indicated
was appropriate, and has decided what is affordable.
— The
Government has also made some decisions about eligibility for
the scheme and has given reasons for those decisions, which I
cannot say are unreasonable.
— Most
importantly, Parliament debated the Equitable Life (Payments)
Bill at some length on 10 November 2010. In the course of that
debate various amendments to the Government's proposals were considered
but not supported. Parliament supported the Government's proposals.
As you will recall, the final paragraphs of Chapter
14 of my July 2008 report, which covered remedy and recommendations,
read as follows:
"….I invite Parliament to consider the
issues that have been raised in this report and the recommendations
that I have made and to further reflect on what its response to
my report should be."
"Having alerted Parliament to the injustice
that I have found was sustained in consequence of maladministration,
I would be very happy to assist Parliament in its deliberations
in any way I can."
I have done all I can to assist Parliament in its
deliberations, most recently in my appearance before the Public
Administration Select Committee on 14 October 2010. Parliament
has considered the issues raised in my report and has now decided
what its response to my report should be, as I invited it to do.
As I am sure you will understand, it would not be
appropriate for me to express a view on whether the decisions
taken by Parliament on 10 November 2010 were right. My role is
to assist Parliament in its deliberations, not to comment on its
decisions.
In summary my position is as follows:
— Whilst
I recognise that some of the people who complained to me will
be extremely disappointed by the Government's decisions on affordability
and eligibility, I cannot say that those decisions are incompatible
with the recommendations in my report.
— As
Parliament's Ombudsman, it has been my task to report independently
to Parliament on this matter, so that Parliament can be informed
in the decisions it takes. Parliament has considered the issues
raised in my report and the recommendations I made and has provided
its response. It would not be appropriate for me to comment on
what Parliament has decided.
Ann Abraham
Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
| 
