Appendix 2:
Service Complaints
Commissioner's Response
Thank you and the Committee for your continuing interest
in the work of the Service Complaints Commissioner. I welcome
the Report of the Committee published in February this year and
support the recommendations made.
I enclose my response to those recommendations directed
to me as the Service Complaints Commissioner (SCC). In relation
to recommendations made also to the MoD, I have met officials
to consider the joint implications and to seek to co-ordinate
our response. For the avoidance of doubt, however, I should stress
that the response attached represents the SCC view.
Dr Susan Atkins
Service Complaints Commissioner for the Armed Forces
3 May 2013
Fear of redundancy
Recommendation:
We are further concerned that the Commissioner
and others are reporting that fears of redundancy among Service
personnel appear to be deterring them from making Service complaints.
It is unacceptable that Service personnel who believe they have
a genuine grievance in relation to redundancy or any other matter
are reluctant to seek redress and resolution of the matter through
the appropriate channels because they fear the consequences of
making a complaint. As a matter of urgency the MoD and the Commissioner
should investigate this matter and report their findings to us
in response to our Report. (Paragraph 16)
SCC Response:
The SCC met the MoD in March 2013 to consider how
to investigate the extent to which fear of redundancy or other
matters was affecting a willingness to make a Service Complaint
(SC). MoD officials had already discussed this matter with their
research department. It was agreed that MoD would subject existing
data (e.g. in the AFCAS reports) to further analysis to seek get
behind the reasons for not making a SC. The MoD would also explore
the possibility of amending or adding to existing or planned surveys
and would consult Service charities, including the Families Federations,
to get more information. In the light of information from this
activity, the MoD and SCC would jointly consider further action,
for example approaches to personnel subject to redundancy or sending
questionnaires to those who approach the SCC.
Systemic failures
Recommendation:
The MoD, the Commissioner and the single Services
should undertake further work to improve the way weaknesses are
identified and lessons learnt. Attention should be given to the
areas that the Commissioner has already identified as demonstrating
systemic weaknesses such as pay and allowances, the application
of policy and procedure and the relationship between the criminal
justice system, the military system and the Service complaints
system. (Paragraph 23)
SCC Response:
The SCC first recommended that the MoD establish
a system for identifying lessons to be learned from complaints
and for monitoring action taken, in her Annual Report 2008, (recommendation
3.2). The SCC's Annual Report 2012 set out the approach the Navy
has taken with regard to identifying any lessons arising from
Service complaints. The SCC has discussed with MoD officials how
to extend this approach across all three Services and the MoD.
The MoD has set a timetable for doing so. The SCC will work with
the MoD on this and consider how to incorporate lessons arising
from the SCC's work and put our existing practice of identifying
lessons on a more systematic basis.
Bullying inquiry
Recommendation:
We note that the Commissioner has requested that
the Adjutant General undertake an inquiry in relation to the serious
complaints that she received in 2012 in respect of the Army. (Paragraph
31)
SCC Response:
The SCC has agreed with the Adjutant General that
she will participate in this review, which it is intended will
start by the end of June 2013 (dependent on the conclusion of
one key complaint case).
Fee earning HIOs
Recommendation:
We further recommend that the Commissioner undertake
an analysis of the effectiveness of HIOs at the end of 2013 and
this should be included as part of her 2013 Annual Report. (Paragraph
36)
SCC Response:
The SCC made a recommendation in Annual Report 2012
that the Services should provide her with a full report on their
use of fee earning HIOs during 2012 and 2013 for consideration
in her next annual report (Annual Report 2013). This should include
data on how many have been used, how quickly they were appointed,
costs, an end user assessment of the quality of investigations
and the impact on timeliness of handling Service complaints. The
MoD have subsequently agreed with the SCC that they will also
produce and consider data on whether the complainant goes on to
appeal any decision made on the basis of such an investigation
or, if the person complained about, goes on to make a new complaint
about the investigation itself.
Effectiveness of changes
Recommendation:
The changes to deal with issues relating to demand
and resources, delay, and appeals while beneficial in themselves
are tweaking a system that needed to be fundamentally redesigned
and simplified. The MoD must demonstrate to us, and more importantly
to Service personnel, that the changes will bring real benefits
and lead to a fairer and more efficient system. In response to
our Report, the Commissioner and the MoD should set out how they
will measure the effectiveness of these changes. (Paragraph 48)
SCC Response:
The SCC has reached agreement with the MoD that the
key success criteria will include timeliness and appeal rates.
The SCC also believes that costs should be included and awaits
the MoD response to this recommendation.
Armed Forces Ombudsman
Recommendation:
We see no reason why the MoD and the Commissioner
cannot agree a model for an Armed Forces Ombudsman that satisfies
both their aspirations and concerns. (Paragraph 60)
The Commissioner has regularly reported that the
Service complaints system was not efficient, effective or fair
and that the current system was not sustainable and needed simplification
and redesign. An important first step to rectifying this would
be to resolve the continuing debate on the role of the Commissioner.
The MoD, Services and Commissioner should increase their efforts
to resolve the differences between them on the Commissioner's
role. (Paragraph 66)
SCC Response:
In her Annual Report 2012, the SCC urged the Secretary
of State for Defence to re-consider her recommendation for an
Armed Forces Ombudsman, in the light of the endorsement by the
Defence Committee. The MoD is engaging with SCC on this recommendation.
The SCC has had discussions with senior Service personnel in all
three Services and two meetings already with MoD officials to
scope out what such a role might entail and the costs/benefits.
A third meeting is planned for mid-May. I would expect the MoD
to be able to set out their position on changing the SCC role
to that of an Armed Forces Ombudsman in their formal response
to my Annual Report 2012.
SCC resources
Recommendation:
In response to our Report, the MoD should inform
us of the outcome of the discussions on future resources and the
Commissioner should confirm that the additional resources are
adequate to allow her to fulfil her tasks. (Paragraph 72)
SCC Response:
The MoD's attempt to find the SCC an extra temporary
member of staff to support the introduction of the changes to
SCC powers from January 2013 has, unfortunately, come to nothing
and the SCC has so far been given no additional resources.
The SCC has considered the level of permanent resources
necessary to support her work, under these changes and the anticipated
work demands over the next 3 years. One reason for recommending
an Armed Forces Ombudsman was efficiency, i.e. that an Ombudsman
would enable the Service Complaints system as a whole to be simplified
and make better use of resources. Given the meaningful discussion
now taking place between the SCC and MoD about simplification
of the Service Complaints system and more fundamental changes
to the SCC role, the SCC has not yet submitted a bid to the MoD
on this basis. She remains of the view that an Ombudsman role
would enable more efficient use of both Services and MoD resources
and SCC resources. Subject to the outcome of current discussions,
she intends to make a bid in relation to changes to an Ombudsman
model. If these discussions fail, the SCC will submit a bid for
the resources required for her current role and the anticipated
workload for the next three years. The SCC will report on the
outcome of such resource bids in her 2013 Annual Report.
| 
