7 The future: An ombudsman for England?
89. In an articlewritten for The Guardian
on 27 November 2013, Adam Sampson, Legal Ombudsman, referring
to the large number of ombudsmen and complaints systems in the
UK, said that "our complaints system is a mess" and
the cost of maintaining multiple systems is "startlingly
high". He went on to suggest that government should grasp
the opportunity for change:
to bring some order and efficiency
into what is an unwieldy, expensive and confusing world. If that
means combining some schemes and eliminating others-so be it.[95]
An English Ombudsman service?
90. We considered the extent to which
an alternative model for public services ombudsmen could alleviate
some of the problems individuals face when complaining about public
services. Patrick Dunleavy,Professor of Political Science and
Public Policy at the London School of Economics, in his 2010 work
Joining Up Citizen Redress in UK Central Government, suggested
that the organisation of ombudsmen is problematic, especially
insofar as there is no integrated system of ombudsman services
in England. Professor Dunleavy told us that:
The time is long overdue when we
should aim to create within England the same kind of integrated
public services ombudsman that we see in Scotland and Wales, which
looks across health, local government and central government services,
and does this in an integrated way.[96]
91. There are examples of ombudsmen
services being integrated in order to deliver a single service
for a particular sector. The Financial Ombudsman, for example,
told us that the service brought together a number of ombudsman
schemes to create a "one stop shop' for financial services
disputes".[97] Peter
Tyndall, the Ombudsman and Information Commissioner for Ireland
and previously the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales, said that:
with a joined up public service
ombudsman approach as practised in Wales, Scotland and Northern
Ireland, it is very much easier for the service user to complain
and for the kind of complaints which cross agency borders, such
as health and social care, to be effectively dealt with.[98]
92. Witnesses were generally supportive
of such an approach for England. Dame Julie Mellor, the current
PHSO, said that having a single public services ombudsman wouldbe
better for individuals with complaints relating to health and
social care, who currently could approach either PHSO or the Local
Government Ombudsman with their complaint, depending on the service
provided.[99]We did hear
some notes of caution, however. The Housing Ombudsman said:
A single PSOE [Public Services Ombudsman
for England] appears, superficially, to be a good thing but, from
my point of view, it is another myth that has emerged from the
mists of prejudice and assumption. To my knowledge it has never
been subjected to what the judges call 'nice chemical analysis'.Before
I could support this idea I should need to be convinced by:
Clearly set out aims, objectives,
and outcomes;
A clearly set out, argued rationale
as to why it would be an improvement on where we are now;
An audit of necessary changes to
primary legislation;
An informed and authoritative assessment
of the likelihood of legislative changes and a clear indication
of timescales;
A comprehensive risk assessment.[100]
93. In evidence to the Committee, the
Rt Hon Oliver Letwin MP, Minister for Government Policy, said
that:
My personal view is that there is
a great deal of merit in trying to thin down what is described
in one of the reports that has been done as 'a complaints maze'.
Part of that is to take very seriously the recommendation of the
Parliamentary Ombudsman herself—that there should be some
amalgamation of ombudsmen. We will have to think through that
all very carefully and consult an awful lot of people.[101]
THE REMIT OF A SINGLE PUBLIC SERVICES
OMBUDSMAN FOR ENGLAND
94. Witnesses suggested to us that bringing
together ombudsmen that currently deal with complaints about public
services in England, such as the Local Government Ombudsman, the
Housing Ombudsman, and the relevant parts of PHSO, could be beneficial
in making it simpler for people to complain. The organisation
Which? illustrated in their evidence the complexity of current
arrangements:
if a user has a complaint about
their care home or home care agency, there are currently up to
five different bodies that they could be expected to report their
complaint to—their provider, the local authority, the Local
Government Ombudsman, the CQC or Local Healthwatch.[102]
It was also suggested that a single
public services ombudsman for England could help to reduce some
of the confusion individuals experienced with services increasingly
being delivered via the public and private sectors. The Local
Government Ombudsman said:
The public should not have to make
complex determinations about who isaccountable fordelivering their
service, and therefore liable for redress,and which Ombudsman
can help them when those servicesfail. [...] Asingle Public Services
OmbudsmanServicefor Englandcould provide people in England witha
unified, consistent and comprehensive service which avoids the
current systemic confusion.[103]
95. Some suggested that a single public
services ombudsman for England could also assume responsibility
for some areas of public service where there are gaps in the provision
of dispute resolution. Dame Julie Mellor told us that:
At the moment, we have our two schemes,
health and UK services, we have the Local Government Ombudsman,
we have the Housing Ombudsman, but education at the moment is
a bit missing. Therefore, defining this as something that is about
all public services rather than listing which services are in
or out, for the public it is everything that is publicly funded
[...].[104]
THE ISSUE OF SCALE
96. Some witnesses warned of the risks
associated with establishing a single public services ombudsman
for England. Professor Brian Thompson, who was involved in research
in Northern Ireland that led to proposals for reform of the Northern
Ireland Ombudsman, raised the issue of the scale of England, saying
that:
it would be a very large office
if you were to replicate the devolved services in Scotland and
Wales within England. I am not sure whether that would be an appropriate
size.[105]
97. The Local Government Ombudsman suggested
that with different types of services being covered, "employing
lead ombudsmen for different sectors" could help to ensure
that the ombudsman could demonstrate expertise in different thematic
areas.[106] Professor
Dunleavy suggested that a single public services ombudsman could
incorporate a regional focus:
Ideally, the Parliamentary Ombudsman
Service would have a regional setup like the Local Government
Ombudsman has, with a level somewhere between three and nine Government
regions. Then there will be a National Ombudsman to do national
things and to be a lead to pull together the whole redress picture,
to consult with appeals and regulatory bodies. Regional commissioners
or regional parliamentary ombudsmen should have a detailed knowledge
of their local area and all the authorities, MPs and others in
their area. I think that is impossible to do at the national level.[107]
98. We
believe that the creation of a single public services ombudsman
for England would be beneficial. For complainants it would create
a much simpler and more accessible ombudsman service, and for
public services would allow learning and good practice to be disseminated
more easily. The size of England does present a challenge for
an Ombudsman, but we believe the creation of branch offices could
go some way to addressing the issue and should be explored.
99. We recommend that the Government
bring forward, and consult on, proposals to create a single public
services ombudsman for England, bringing together, for example,
the relevant parts of Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman,
Local Government Ombudsman, and Housing Ombudsman. The jurisdiction
of any single public services ombudsman for England should include
areas of public services that could benefit from an ombudsman
service, including for example, some educational institutions.
Branch offices for the public services ombudsman for Englandshould
also be explored, to facilitate access for all parts of England
and so the office can gather perspective on the performance of
public services and administration from across the country.
The implications of devolution:
A UK Ombudsman?
100. Professor Robert Hazell, Professor
of Government and the Constitution, University College London,
supported the idea of a single public services ombudsman for England
but noted that:
we must all be aware that there
is a devolution wrinkle to this, because the Parliamentary Ombudsman
is also responsible for complaints in non-devolved matters in
Scotland and Wales.[108]
101. He considers that transforming
the office of PHSO into a single public services ombudsman for
England would not be sufficient. Devolution in Scotland, Wales
and Northern Ireland has led to adjustments and developments of
the ombudsman schemes. PHSO continues to handle complaints about
matters that were not devolved to Wales, Scotland and Northern
Ireland as well as complaints about maladministration in government
departments, agencies and other public bodies in the UK in relation
to England, "so it has a mix of jurisdictions; some UK wide,
some GB wide, some simply English and some NIonly".[109]Jim
Martin, Scottish Public Services Ombudsman, told us:
[...] the one cautionary thing I
would say to you is, do not confuse the role of the UK Parliamentary
Ombudsman with an English Public Services Ombudsman. It is very
important to remember that the UK Parliamentary Ombudsman is a
UK function, not an English function, and it has to be looked
at and dealt with—however it is dealt with—in that
way [...]were there to be a decision to go down the road of creating
an English Public Services Ombudsman, it would be very important
to remember that currently within the PHSO, there are two bodies.
There is a Parliamentary Ombudsman, which is a UK body, and the
Health Service Ombudsman, which is an English body. You have to
make sure that you do not put the UK as part of an English Public
Services Ombudsman. It has got to be thought through.[110]
102. Dame Julie Mellor summarised the
problem that would need to be addressed:
Whatever is done would need to be
coherent for the service providers.For example, it would not make
sense to have all the different nationalUKombudsmen services considering
complaints aboutUKservices within each nation, because you would
then potentially have inconsistent decisions by different ombudsman
services.[111]
103. A number of options to address
the problem were suggested, such as the retention of a public
service ombudsman for the UK as well as the creationof a separate
ombudsman service just for England, or to ask one ombudsman to
take on the UK function and report to all Parliaments and Assemblies.
Peter Tyndall summarised the options he thought could be considered:
it might be worth contemplating
that there are probably three ways of doing it, broadly speaking
in models. One of them would be to have [...] an English Public
Services Ombudsman mirroring the devolved functions ombudsmen
in the three devolved countries, with a UK Parliamentary Ombudsman
dealing with non-devolved matters. That is one model. The other
one is to combine the two, and I think that does cause constitutional
difficulties, personally. I think that is problematic, to have
a body that is England at one level and UK at another. [...]
One of the other solutions, the
most radical solution, which is probably worth thinking about,
is the question of simply 'Why not ask the Ombudsman [...] to
deal with all of the complaints that arise about public services
there, and report to the two Parliaments? [...] That way, the
public gets a completely joined-up service in England, Wales,
Scotland, and Northern Ireland.[112]
104. The
present division of power between the devolved governments of
Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland presents a difficulty for
those seeking to provide England with a national ombudsman service.
Non-devolved matters require a UK-wide Ombudsman Service. As long
as the UK Parliament and the UK Government are responsible for
the law and administration of England as well as for UK non-devolved
matters, there will be a need for a distinctive ombudsman service
for these functions.
105. We recommend that the Government
bring forward, and consult on, proposals to deliver an effective
ombudsman service for UK non-devolved matters—in addition
to that of a single public services ombudsman for England—in
order to optimise an ombudsman service for the UK citizen in respect
of those functions. This could be provided, for example, either
as a single ombudsman with a dual role as UK and England Ombudsman,
or the UK and England ombudsman services could each have separate
legal personality.
95 "Time to streamline Britain's Complaints system",
The Guardian, 26 November 2013 Back
96
Q11 Back
97
The Financial Ombudsman Service (PHS32) Back
98
Public Services Ombudsman for Wales (PHS12) Back
99
Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHS14) Back
100
Housing Ombudsman (PHS34) Back
101
Oral evidence taken on 16 October 2013, HC (2013-14) 229, Q404
[Rt Hon Oliver Letwin MP) Back
102
Which? (COM 12) Back
103
Local Government Ombudsman (PHS51) Back
104
Q227 Back
105
Q13 Back
106
Local Government Ombudsman (PHS 51) Back
107
Q11 Back
108
Q12 Back
109
The Ombudsman - the developing role in the UK, Standard
Note SN/PC/04832, House of Commons Library, November 2012 Back
110
Qq108-109 Back
111
Q227 Back
112
Q111 Back
|
