Issue 38 August 2009 Biennial Conference · 6 Super troupers ‘Fernando’ takes a lighter look at the BIOA Conference 8 Write like a Barbarian? Some civilised advice 9 Spotlight

Issue 38 August 2009The newsletter of the British and Irish Ombudsman Association

1 Cover storyReport on the 2009 BIOA Conference

2 Newsdesk

4 Fair PremisesThe Local Government Ombudsman: Beverley House in York

6 Super troupers ‘Fernando’ takes a lighter look at the BIOA Conference

8 Write like a Barbarian?Some civilised advice

9 Spotlight on…The Ombudsman for the Defence Forces of Ireland

10 The Ombudsman Enterprise and Administrative Justice An academic viewpoint

11 Profiles Jane Hingston Lead Ombudsman, UK Financial Ombudsman Service and Ruth Marks MBE Older People’s Commissioner for Wales

12 Public Defender, Georgia Gabby Crane reports on a human rights institution

13 Identity crisisMike Reddy in the grey areas of what defines an Ombudsman

14 NCPAS

14 Six livesResponding to Mencap complaints

14 Ombudsman Practice Course

The Association’s 8th Biennial Conference was held on 7 and 8 May. It celebrated

200 years of the institution of the ombudsman, examining how and where BIOA and its member schemes fit into that landscape. The overall theme was ‘Much done – still more to do’. An article about the conference and a selection of photographs are on the inside pages, for those who wish to find out what went on behind the headlines and the song lines…

On the first morning there was an initial plenary session about the future of the Association, followed by the Annual Meeting. The format this year was a mixture of traditional lectures in the tiered theatre and more informal workshops, as follows:

1st session:Future direction of BIOA Chair:

Emily O’Reilly (Ombudsman for Ireland, BIOA Chair)Speakers:

n Laurence Shurman (former Banking Ombudsman, first BIOA Chairman)

n Fiona McLeod (Energy & Water Ombudsman for Victoria, ANZOA Chair) Walter Merricks (Chief Ombudsman, Financial Ombudsman Service)

2nd session: Annual Meeting Chair:

Emily O’Reilly (Ombudsman for Ireland, BIOA Chair)Secretary:

Ian Pattison (BIOA Secretary)

3rd session: Report from academics on

review of public sector ombudsmen

Chair:

Professor Mary Seneviratne (Director of Research, Nottingham Law School)Speakers:

n Dr Richard Kirkham (Lecturer in Law, University of Sheffield)

n Brian Thompson (Senior Lecturer in Law, University of Liverpool)

Workshops:

n Stakeholder consultations: a lever for change

n Information security: pitfalls and good practice

n Freedom of Information

4th session:Consumer redress Chair:

Elizabeth France (Chief Ombudsman, tOSL – Telecommunications, Energy and Surveyors Ombudsman schemes)Speakers:

n Steve Brooker (Head of Fair Markets, Consumer Focus)

n Ann Fitzgerald (Chief Executive, National Consumer Agency, Ireland)

Workshops:

n New media and the Ombudsman

n Equality and diversityn Governance

5th session:Public redressChair:

Jerry White (Local Government Ombudsman for England, BIOA Vice-Chair)Speakers:

n Kenneth Parker QC Continued on page 16

Biennial Conference 2009

From left: Aubrey McCrory (ICO), Emily O'Reilly (BIOA Chair and Ombudsman for Ireland) with Graham Smith (ICO)

Newsdesk Newsdesk Newsdesk Newsdesk

The Property OmbudsmanOn 1 May, the Ombudsman for Estate Agents (OEA) became The Property Ombudsman. Over the last two years the OEA has expanded rapidly and the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman, Christopher Hamer, has broadened beyond estate agency and residential sales into lettings, small commercial transactions, UK based agents selling overseas property and Home

Information Pack providers. The scheme felt that the new title is now more appropriate and gives consumers a better understanding of coverage. More information can be found at the new website address www. tpos.co.uk.

Irish Pensions Ombudsman reappointedPaul Kenny was reappointed as Pensions Ombudsman for Ireland on 2 July. Mr Kenny was first appointed to the role

in 2003. The role of the Pensions Ombudsman is to investigate complaints of financial loss due to maladministration and disputes of fact or law in relation to occupational pension schemes and Personal Retirement Savings Accounts (PRSAs).

New Chairman of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission

Dermot Gallagher was appointed Chairman of the GSOC with effect from 5 May. Mr Gallagher

replaces Mr Justice Kevin Haugh who died unexpectedly at

the end of January. Dermot Gallagher assumed the chairmanship of GSOC, which investigates complaints against An Garda Síochána, within weeks

of his retirement as Secretary General of the Department of Foreign Affairs.

Mr Gallagher joined the Department of Foreign Affairs in 1969. He served in San Francisco, at the United Nations in New York, and in London, Nigeria and Brussels. From 1997 to 2000 he was second Secretary General at the Department of Foreign Affairs; from 2000 to 2001 he was Secretary General of the Department of the Taoiseach before moving back to the Department of Foreign Affairs as its Secretary General.

Mr Gallagher joins the two existing Commissioners of GSOC, Conor Brady and Carmel Foley, who have served as Commissioners since the GSOC opened its doors in 2007.

Walter Merricks CBE After ten years at the Financial Ombudsman Service (and three years before that as Insurance Ombudsman)

A note from the EditorThis issue is a reflective one, fittingly so following the Biennial Conference at which delegates discussed the evolution of ombudsmen in general and the future direction of BIOA in particular. There are two write-ups of the conference, accompanied by photographs – carefully selected, the dancing queens will be relieved to note! This edition offers further airing of two subjects of debate – the review of public sector ombudsmen and accreditation in complaint handling.

Mike Reddy of the OIAHE provides a personal exploration of what an ombudsman is and how they may be perceived by the public. His article draws on international experience, a perspective reinforced by a separate and sobering article about the work

of the Ombudsman of Georgia.Closer to home, we report on a Scottish

health complaints network which is seeking to expand, and on a significant report published earlier this year about the provision of public services to people with learning disabilities. We profile Jane Hingston of the Financial Ombudsman Service, who has recently joined the BIOA Executive Committee, and Ruth Marks, the Older People’s Commissioner for Wales. Our spotlight features the Ombudsman for the Defence Forces of Ireland and our Fair Premises are Beverley House, home of the Local Government Ombudsman in York.

Plenty of BIOA news as well as a range of views to ponder in these long summer days…

Best wishes, Emma Gray, Editor.

Ombudsman and Information Commissioner in Ireland reappointedOn 11 June, Emily O'Reilly (right) was appointed to a second six year term as Ombudsman

and Information Commissioner by the President of Ireland Mary McAleese in a ceremony at her official residence, Áras an Úachtaráin, Dublin.

Dermot Gallagher

Paul Kenny

2 The Ombudsman Issue 38

Newsdesk Newsdesk

The Ombudsman Issue 38 3

Newsdesk Newsdesk

Walter Merricks, the FOS Chief Ombudsman, is moving on. The exact timing of his departure remains to be settled, and he says there is important work to be done in the meantime.

A new post in health professions adjudication will keep him in the justice arena. It will involve the challenge of setting up a new and independent organisation, building on good work that has gone before. The role is not full time and Walter hopes to find opportunities to pursue his interests in the legal, regulatory and financial worlds.

Scottish Parliamentary Standards CommissionerStuart Allan became the

new Scottish Parliamentary Standards Commissioner with effect from 2 April this year. The previous post-holder, Dr Jim Dyer, reached the end of his second and final term on 31 March after six years in post.

The Parliamentary Standards Commissioner has powers to investigate complaints of alleged breaches of the Members’ Code of Conduct and has statutory powers to summon witnesses and compel evidence.

Stuart is currently the Chief Investigating Officer to the Standards Commission for Scotland. This role sees him investigate and report on cases where councillors or members of devolved public bodies may have contravened the relevant codes of conduct. He will carry out both roles on

a part-time basis.

Appointment of Chair of Administrative Justice and Tribunals CouncilLord Chancellor and Secretary of State Jack Straw appointed Richard Thomas as the new Chair of the AJTC with the agreement of the Scottish and Welsh Ministers. He will take up his post on 1 September.

Richard has been the Information Commissioner since November 2002 with a range of responsibilities under the Freedom of Information Act and Data Protection Act and related laws. He retired

from the post on 28 June.Richard is currently Deputy

Chairman of the Consumers Association – publishers of Which? magazine – and a Trustee of the Whitehall and Industry Group.

Richard has been appointed for a period of four years. He will succeed the Right Honourable Lord Newton of Braintree OBE, DL whose appointment has been extended from 1 April for a period of five months.

Congratulations to Richard on being awarded a CBE in the Queen’s Birthday Honours List.

Scottish Parliament Committee reportIn its May 21 report, the Review of Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body Supported Bodies Committee made a number of recommendations to improve the authority, structure and terms and conditions of the Commissioners and Ombudsman supported by the SPCB. It stated that Scotland’s Commissioner for Children and the Scottish Commission for Human Rights should be retained as separate bodies.

Further key recommendations were: n A new Standards body to

undertake investigations into complaints against elected members including MSPs and councillors. It will also consider public appointments

n The transfer of prison complaints to the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman

The report was approved by Parliament and a Committee Bill is now in its first stages.

FOS confirms its plans to publish business-specific complaint dataIn his independent review of the Financial Ombudsman

Continued on page 4

The Financial Services Ombudsman for Ireland hosted the Annual Conference of the International Network of Financial Services Ombudsman Schemes in Dublin Castle from 24–26 June 2009. This was the first time Ireland has hosted this annual conference.

Reflecting the current economic and financial difficulties experienced on an international level, the theme of this year’s conference was ‘Financial Ombudsmen – Never more needed?’ The conference’s host, Joe Meade (Financial Services Ombudsman for Ireland), stated that the purpose of the conference was to “refocus us all on what we, as Ombudsmen, are about and in a sense help to ensure that the role of Financial Services Ombudsmen is fully appreciated by all stakeholders.” The conference addressed current problems and complaints regarding banking, insurance and investment areas and considered how such

issues were being addressed by different financial services ombudsman schemes worldwide.

The conference was attended by over 150 delegates from Europe, the Americas, Asia, Africa, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, indicating the growing network of financial ombudsman schemes worldwide. Speakers included members of financial ombudsman schemes, the Financial Regulator and academics, as well as media and industry representatives. The conference was opened by Ireland’s Minister for Finance (Brian Lenihan, T.D.). The European Union Commissioner for the Internal Market and Services, Charlie McCreevy, spoke on current developments at EU level in consumer and financial areas.

Full details of the conference are available on the Financial Services Ombudsman’s website: www.financialombudsman.ie

Left to right: L Hattix (USA), C. Neave (Australia), W. Merricks (UK), J. Meade (Ireland), L. Nabholz-Haidegger (Switzerland), K. Scott (Australia), J. Preiss (South Africa) F. Frizon (France).

International Network of Financial Services Ombudsman Schemes

Richard Thomas

Newsdesk Newsdesk Newsdesk Newsdesk


One Saturday morning just under 19 years ago David Laverick, the then Director of the Local Government Ombudsman’s office for the North of England, showed staff buildings shortlisted for transfer and expansion into from our sites at Castlegate and Piccadilly in York city centre. Staff expressed an overwhelming preference for Beverley House. We moved in that summer on a 25 year lease from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF).

Set in generous grounds about a mile north of the city centre on the A19, Beverley House has provided traditional office accommodation for up to about 83 staff on two main floors and a smaller attic floor. It has good provision for bicycle and car parking and is close to shops and other facilities at Clifton

Green. However, what makes it special are the gardens, croquet lawn and tennis court to the rear, and its location next to the immaculate, privately run (by JRF) Homestead Park. In summer particularly, the sporting facilities are well used by staff. Most of the children of staff will have spent many hours of their early years in the Park’s adventure playground and expansive gardens.

Built between 1893 and 1909, it was originally the home of Thomas Appleton, a Director of Rowntrees and the first non-family trustee of JRF. It was bought by Seebohm Rowntree (Joseph Rowntree’s son) in 1945, at least in part because it abuts the Park and because he thought its frontage onto the A19 could be useful in

future. He divided it into three flats. In 1948 one became vacant and was altered to become offices for JRF. Soon JRF occupied the entire ground floor. Additional wings were built on each side of, and in the style of, the original house and eventually all three Rowntree Trusts moved into it.

In the late 1970s the famous Homestead building on the other side of the Park (originally the home of Seebohm and his family) was renovated and converted for use as the office headquarters of Rowntree Mackintosh Ltd. When Nestlé bought out Rowntrees in 1988, JRF (soon followed by the other two trusts) moved across to the Homestead – creating the vacancy we took advantage of.

Fair PremisesThe Local Government Ombudsman: Beverley House in YorkNo. 9 in a seriesBy John McCullough, Investigator in the York office

Beverley House

Service, Lord Hunt of the Wirral recommended that the service should make information publicly available about how individual financial businesses dealt with complaints. Lord Hunt was of the view that:n transparency could help

to improve performance, particularly amongst weaker financial businesses, by giving strong incentives to make visible, public progress

n bringing information into the public domain sensibly, clearly and with all necessary caveats fully explained, could have a major preventative effect.

The Board of the FOS subsequently decided that the service should publish complaint data on individual financial businesses. Following public consultation on the relevant data which was available for publication and the practical matters that remained to be resolved, the FOS has now set out its plans to: n publish business-specific

complaint data every six months, starting from the autumn of 2009

n publish the numbers of new cases and the percentage of closed cases where there has been a change of outcome in favour of the consumer

n for comparison, publish the

average percentage change in outcome

n break the data according to financial services industry sectors

FOS’ policy statement – Publication of complaint data: What we will do – can be found on its website at www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/policy-statements/complaint_data_mar09.html.

Strengthening financial service regulation and protecting consumers In his April budget statement, the Chancellor of the Exchequer acknowledged that the recent disruption in financial services markets had

seriously affected consumers’ trust and confidence, and that these developments had come in addition to longstanding problems in retail financial services markets.

The statement contemplated a number of measures directed at protecting and supporting consumers of financial services and restoring consumer trust and confidence in financial markets. Amongst them were measures to support swift redress if things go wrong.

Set against the background of recent events, the budget statement also flagged that the Government would be bringing forward proposals

Continued from page 3

Newsdesk Newsdesk


Newsdesk Newsdesk

to ensure that the relevant financial services consumer protection bodies, including the Financial Ombudsman Service, were best able to respond to the market turmoil challenges.

A White Paper exploring the Government proposals is expected soon.

New Manchester site for PHSOThe Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) now has a Manchester site which has been thriving since the first staff arrived in January 2009. The decision to extend PHSO’s workforce was taken in response to the increased workload anticipated as a result of the new and simplified arrangements for NHS complaints in England. The Manchester team now consists of around 100, mostly new, staff members.

The new two stage complaint system will mean a quicker and more straightforward service for complainants but also means that extra staff are needed to handle the additional 12,000 health enquiries expected to be received by PHSO. Under the new system anyone who

feels that their complaint has not been handled satisfactorily by their local NHS body or practice can complain directly to the Ombudsman.

The PHSO continues to works as one Office though it is split over two sites. The two-site structure is invisible to complainants as post is dealt with centrally and phone numbers in both buildings use the same exchange numbers. The Manchester office is currently focused on health complaints and is closely linked to the London team working on the same area. New staff in Manchester are receiving mentoring from experienced case workers and assessors,

some of whom relocated from London but many of whom are spending time at the new location. New technology also supports close ties and video-conferencing is now a normal part of how PHSO does business.

Deputy Northern Ireland OmbudsmanMarie Anderson was appointed Deputy Ombudsman for Northern Ireland from 1 May, replacing the former deputy, John McQuarrie. Marie was formerly the Assistant Information Commissioner for Northern Ireland, in which role she helped establish the regional office of the Information Commissioner. Marie is a solicitor by profession and has worked in the both the public and private sectors in this capacity. Although Marie has specialised in information law, she has also worked in the voluntary sector and has a background in housing and welfare rights.

The European OmbudsmanThe European Ombudsman, Nikiforos Diamandouros, has released a new interactive online guide for complainants.

It is available from his office and aims to direct citizens, companies, NGOs and other organisations to the body which is best placed to deal with their complaints or information requests. Contact www.ombudsman.europa.eu for details.

Sharpening Your TeethThe next course in ‘Advanced Investigative Training for Administrative Watchdogs’, run by the office of the Ontario Ombudsman, will take place in Toronto from November 30 to December 2 (for details see www.ombudsman.on.ca).

BIOA Executive CommitteeAfter election at the Annual Meeting on 7 May 2009, the Executive Committee now comprises the following:

ChairEmily O’ReillyOmbudsman and Information Commissioner,Ireland

Representatives of Voting MembersChris HamerOmbudsman for Estate AgentsJane HingstonOmbudsman, Financial Ombudsman ServicePeter TyndallPublic Services Ombudsman for WalesJerry White (Vice-chair of the Association)Local Government Ombudsman for England

Representative of Voting Members from IrelandPaul KennyPensions Ombudsman, Ireland

Representatives of Associate Members

Ros GardnerIndependent Complaints Mediator for the Criminal

Future event – A date for your diary

BIOA Annual Meeting 2010 The 2010 Association Dinner and Annual Meeting will take place on 13 and 14 May respectively, both events being held at the National Museum of Wales in Cardiff. The format will be similar to the event held in Edinburgh in 2008, with the Association Dinner being held in the evening of Thursday,13 May in the Grand Hall of the Museum. This will be for all those attending the Annual Meeting on the following day, plus invited guests of the Association. Before that, during the afternoon of 13 May, the office of the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales will run a ‘fringe event’ for staff of BIOA member schemes attending the Annual Meeting.

On Friday,14 May, the Annual Meeting of the Association will be held during the morning in the Reardon Smith Theatre at the Museum. As well as the normal business meeting of the Association, there will be guest speakers on the topic of ‘Reducing bureaucracy in complaint handling‘. This will be followed by lunch.

The new PHSO office in the Manchester Exchange

Continued on page 6


Newsdesk Super troupersRecords BureauSuzanne McCarthyImmigration Services Commissioner

BIOA Interest GroupsThe First Contact Interest Group met on 3 June for the fourth time at the offices in Liverpool of the Independent Case Examiner for DWP (ICE) with Carol Neill, Outreach Team Leader at the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman as Chair. It was a very well attended meeting with 19 people in total.

The Communications, Legal and HR Interest Groups will meet again in October this year. The Operational Management Seminars Group also plans to run another short seminar around that time.

Attendance at Interest Group meetings is open to any staff member of BIOA member schemes, and new members are always very welcome. Please contact the Secretary ([email protected]) if you are interested in joining one or more of these Groups.

BIOA Working Groupsn Governance Working Group –

continues to meet with Paul Kenny, Pensions Ombudsman for Ireland, as Chair. The draft Guide to Principles of Good Governance was tested at a Conference workshop in May, and it has now been sent for full consultation to BIOA members. It is hoped to issue the final Guide later this year.

n Accreditation Working Group – continues to meet with Ros Gardner, Independent Complaints Mediator for the CRB, as Chair. The Group, through its consultant, Nick O’Brien, is currently working with Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, to run pilot ‘accreditation’ training later his year. (See separate report on page 14).

Notes of all of the Interest Groups and Working Groups, as well as copies of presentations given at conferences and seminars, are in the ‘members’ area’ of the BIOA website. Access information is provided to staff members of member schemes on request to the Secretary, Ian Pattison ([email protected]).

Continued from page 5

Knowing me and, dear reader, knowing you, there’s something I have to make completely and

utterly clear. There was nothing interesting about the Thursday night dinner. I saw no unusual events. No-one enjoyed themselves in any way. Because there was nada, rien, not a thing. At all. And if, the next morning I remembered anything untoward, it must be that I had a dream.

So now that’s out of the way and thoroughly understood, let’s move on to what did happen at the 2009 Biennial BIOA Conference.

Its title was 200 years of the Ombudsman institution: much done – still more to do – reflecting the fact that the original Ombudsman was established in Sweden in 1809. Apparently at the first centenary in 1909 no-one turned up in Coventry to celebrate. This was understandable, as in Britain and Ireland nothing developed until 1967 when the UK Parliamentary Ombudsman was established. Things move much faster these days, which is just as well for the almost 200 delegates who arrived, as in previous years, in the stunningly economical (though very comfortable) surroundings of Scarman House. BIOA is not just a rich man’s world.

The Chair, Emily O’Reilly, the Ombudsman for Ireland (established 1984) opened the first session on the future of BIOA, urging us to participate fully in the conference sessions. She reminded us that it was five years since a previous Chair, Walter Merricks, Chief Ombudsman, Financial Ombudsman Service (established 2001) had conducted a survey on the future of BIOA – and that a new survey was

under way. Laurence Shurman, the first ever Chair, then took us backwards in time, from BIOA’s beginnings at a hotel in Meriden, not far from the present venue, through the then different viewpoints of public and private sector ombudsmen, to the expansion to include Ireland.

Laurence was followed by another Chair and another journey, this time to the southern hemisphere, as we heard from Fiona McLeod of the Australia and New Zealand Ombudsman Association. She made reference to convict beginnings – and then spoke with conviction, and not a little humour, about the experience of her organisation. Finally a fourth Chair drew up to the podium – the previously mentioned Walter Merricks, who, not wasting time with the present, shot forward to 2014 from where he gave us a retrospective (and deliberately controversial) vision of the outcome of the 2009 review. He observed that voting members paid a higher subscription even though there was never anything to vote on. A fiery, but good humoured, exchange in response to remarks about the Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council showed that Emily had not needed to have concerns about delegate participation.

The formal AGM which followed was open to all, whether voting members or not. As Walter predicted, no-one did vote, there being Caroline Mitchell (FOS) David Millington (FOS)

Rob Behrens (OIAHE) and Ann Barker (Bar Standards

Board)

By Fernando

nothing to vote on. Various items were nodded through (or grunted through, that being the preferred form of communication). After the formal business there were updates from the working groups on accreditation and governance, and from the consultants involved in the review of BIOA’s future direction. It was reported that initial results indicated that members thought BIOA was generally a good thing. Delegates were pleased, as whatever the future name of the game, there would doubtless be more conferences.

The format of the remainder of the event differed from past years. Alongside each main session in the lecture theatre, there were three workshops in lecture rooms. The Secretary valiantly tried to explain how this was going to work, but with limited success. For the remainder of the conference puzzled delegates

navigated the corridors in a fog of confusion. SOS!

Your reporter attended his chosen quarter of the sessions.

On the Thursday afternoon he enjoyed Freedom of Information and benefitted from Consumer Redress.

Following tradition, the conference took over the dining room for the Thursday night dinner. And as you have been firmly told, and those who were present already know, nothing happened – apart from good food and good company of course. Also following tradition, some stayed

up to share the company until later than might have been advisable. In the bar there were women and men after midnight. Your reporter retired at a prudent

hour, having met his Waterloo.On then, the next day, after

waking as good as new, to the linked subjects of Unacceptable Behaviour and Managing Customer Expectations (for example explaining that the winner does not always take it all).

One benefit of the new format was the wide range of topics that could be covered, from training (of bodies in jurisdiction) to accreditation (for our staff) to equality and diversity, governance and, for the technologically minded, new media. Your author has canvassed opinions about the sessions he was not able to attend. All were complimentary. Whether the main or subsidiary sessions the conference could not succeed without the contributors’ super efforts. They could fairly be described as real troupers.

The final main session brought us back to the origins of the ombudsman institution, with an entertaining history lesson in the contributions from Scandinavia (Albert Johnson from the Swedish Parliamentary Ombudsman and Arne Fliflet from the Norwegian Parliamentary Ombudsman). Then the European Ombudsman, Nikiforos Diamandouros, gave even the largest of the BIOA member schemes pause for thought by reminding us that he had a constituency of 500 million or so potential complainants. As about 58 million of them would say, “mamma mia!”

Before Emily O’Reilly brought matters to a close, delegates appeared in the lecture theatre from the

various parallel sessions and it was standing room only. Indeed Scarman House may become a victim of the conference’s success, as space has been increasingly under stress over the years. As I write I hear that the Secretary has been asked to take a chance and consider alternative venues. So, though we will meet again (knowing that bye bye does not mean forever), next time it may be another town, another train.

Aha!

This page from top left: Ray Burlingham (AJTC) Julie Meadows and Margaret Doyle (tOSL Council);

Marian Shanley (Irish Law Reform Commission) with Martin Partington (Chair, The Dispute Service

Ltd) and Walter Merricks (FOS); Ann Abraham (PHSO); Members of Table 8 cheerfully await the

start of dinner; Tess Sandford with Cecilia Wells and Rebecca Milner (PHSO); the lecture theatre.



Scientists once thought the dividing line between humans and the rest of the animal

kingdom was our ability to use tools. Now, humans have learned that chimpanzees can use and modify tools to extract tasty termites from a mound, that crows can make a hook from a piece of wire to solve a puzzle, and that rats can chew The Green Book into a nasty pulp and fashion it into successful expenses claims.

So where is the dividing line nowadays? Perhaps it’s the ability of humans to create artwork, contemplate their own death or – like the White Queen in Through the Looking-Glass – ‘to believe as many as six impossible things before breakfast’.

Those who worry about written English, which should include everyone who writes for an ombudsman, often have a similar dividing line between what they regard as civilized text and the savage utterances of knuckle-dragging barbarians.

This article is about a few of the things that are on the wrong side of my dividing line. This is because either they impede clear communication or they distract readers who care about how English is written.

1 Using run-on sentencesRun-on sentences are increasingly common, even among degree-toting professionals like schoolteachers and social workers. Yet they are rare in edited work because most publishers regard them as a gross error of punctuation. In a run-on sentence, the author fails to use a clear sentence-end marker such as a full stop, causing the rushing reader to miscue. Here are three examples:n You will need to change your

employee’s tax codes before the start of the tax year, the

instructions on form P9X tell you how to. (HMRC, 2008)

n Luggage can be carried on our trains, however we ask that you bring no more than you can comfortably carry. (Virgin Trains, 2008)

n The gang are believed to have compiled 19 songs which were put on to the sites, some are thought to have attracted attention from music bosses. (The Times, 2009)

In each case, the comma should be a full stop or semicolon because at that point another full sentence, with its own main verb, begins.

2 Using ‘advise’ when you mean ‘inform’

This crime is rife in business English and further spread by train announcers (or DJs, as some prefer to style themselves): ‘Customers are advised that this train is 12 minutes late.’ Keep ‘advise’ for when you are giving advice to someone. Otherwise tell them, inform them, or let them know.

3 Using ‘refute’ when you mean ‘deny’

Refute means to disprove by giving evidence. Deny means just saying something’s not true. ‘Robin Smith, Yorkshire’s chairman, refuted the allegations.’ (Daily Telegraph, 2005) Not so, as he gave no evidence to support his opinion.

4 Qualifying ‘unique’ ‘Club Med is a totally unique holiday experience’, claims a brochure. Though ‘almost unique’ is just about possible, every schoolchild knows (or used to) that unique is an absolute and needs no qualifying. So ‘each child is unique’ is true even when your buggy holds identical twins. If Roger Federer wins a sixteenth grand slam tournament, his achievement will be unique and not, for example, really or very unique. If you’re groping

for a word of high praise, then ‘special’, ‘astounding’ and ‘remarkable’ may do. For peerless people or animals, ‘nonpareil’ deserves to be more popular. Resist, though, the Latin charms of ‘sui generis’.

5 Writing ‘please find enclosed’This phrase was beloved of servile Victorian clerks who would also sidle up to ‘beg the favour of your esteemed perusal’. These days few envelopes are so big that people have to go a-hunting to ‘find’ things in them. It’s the same with ‘please find attached’. If the damn thing’s attached, why will I have to wake my trusty bloodhound to find it? So use ‘I enclose’ or ‘I attach’ instead.

6 Using useless headingsThe most useless heading in all creation must be ‘Please note’, closely followed by ‘Notice’. I have a leaflet in front of me from a private eye clinic. (No, quick reader, not a clinic for detectives – that would be a private-eye clinic. Nor even a place for Ian Hislop to get his bald pate treated – that would be a Private Eye clinic.) The leaflet, which has print so small it can only be read by people with good eyesight, has numerous predictive headings like ‘Glaucoma’ and ‘Cataracts’, so the skimming, scanning reader can find and study the bits they want. But among the headings is the dreaded ‘Please note’. The text beneath says: ‘At your consultation it may be necessary for you to have eye drops which mean that you will be unable to drive and therefore you will need to arrange for transportation home following your examination.’ So a more predictive heading would perhaps be ‘Warning: don’t drive yourself home’. And while we’re about it, we could do a free translation of that 35-word sentence and split it up: ‘The doctor may put drops in your eyes, which will affect your vision. So please don’t try to drive yourself home afterwards – arrange other transport instead.’

Well, those are some of my principles and, as Groucho Marx said, ‘If you don’t like them, I have others.’

Most Ombudsman investigations culminate in a piece of writing, so it’s important that the readers can easily make sense of it. In the second of a series of three articles, Martin Cutts, research director of Plain Language Commission (www.clearest.co.uk) looks at some common pitfalls and how to avoid them.

How not to write like a barbarian

The first Ombudsman for the Defence Forces was appointed in

2005 to provide members, and former members, of the Irish Defence Forces with an independent appeals procedure for their complaints and grievances and enable civilian oversight of military administrative matters.

The Office is empowered by the Ombudsman (Defence Forces) Act of 2004 which had the benefit of support and consensus at a political level as well from the leadership of the Defence Forces and the respective Representative Associations of Enlisted Personnel and Officers. The first and current Ombudsman is Paulyn Marrinan Quinn, a former Insurance Ombudsman for Ireland.

Ireland is one of a few countries globally where a separate independent civilian Ombudsman exists for members of the Armed Forces. With three full years of work now complete, the Office continues to see significant European and international interest in its working and effectiveness.

All members of the Irish Defence Forces have a right to seek redress of an alleged wrong and if they are not satisfied with the outcome they now have a right to request that the matter be referred to the Ombudsman. Under the legislation, the Ombudsman must be notified in writing of every

complaint initiated and thus monitors the progress of all complaints.

The Ombudsman can deal with complaints from members of the permanent Defence Force and from members of the Reserve Defence Force against a member of the Defence Forces or a civil servant. Complaints must be referred to the Ombudsman within 12 months of the alleged action or of the complainant becoming aware of the action.

Complainants who are serving members must first exhaust the internal military grievance procedures. If complainants are dissatisfied with the outcome of the internal investigation, or if their complaints have not been resolved by the military authorities within 28 days, they can refer the matter to the Ombudsman.

To date, the majority of referrals to the Ombudsman have concerned promotion procedures, nomination and selection for career courses and for overseas service. Although there have been some cases about alleged bullying these have not represented a majority.

The cases referred to the Ombudsman for the Defence Forces increased by 162% in the second year and, launching her third Annual Report in May of this year, the Ombudsman said that referrals to her had risen by a further 40%. Of the cases which the Ombudsman adjudicated, 60% were upheld in favour of the complainant.

In addition to adjudications in respect of individual cases, the Ombudsman has issued findings and recommendations to the

Minister for Defence and senior officials in the Defence Forces in the course of the last three years in respect of systemic issues. Many of these recommendations have resulted in the Defence Forces reviewing and revising a number of human resources, procedural and administrative practices including the selection procedures for career courses and for overseas service.

The Ombudsman has a right of access to all information, documentation and installations for the purposes of her examinations and investigations. In the event that the Minister for Defence were to request that the Ombudsman not investigate, or cease to investigate, an action, he must provide reasons and the Act provides the safeguard that the Ombudsman may apply to the High Court for a declaration that the matter concerned is not of such gravity to warrant such a request.

Launching her Annual Report for 2008, Paulyn Marrinan Quinn said that “by its very presence the Office has been an agent of change and will continue to be a guardian of fairness.”

Third in a series that illuminates member schemes

First and current Ombudsman Paulyn Marrinan Quinn

the Ombudsman for the Defence Forces of Ireland


Spotlight on…

A member of the Irish Defence Forces on duty with the EUFOR mission in Chad


By Brian Thompson, Richard Kirkham and Trevor Buck

The public sector ombudsmen (PSO) have become one of the most important providers of

administrative justice in the UK, yet there is a lack of contemporary research on the institution. With the aim of addressing this shortfall, and with the help of funding from the Economic and Social Research Council, the authors recently conducted a comparative study of PSO in the UK, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand.

As expected, we found similarities in the roles and methods of the PSO. Some of the differences that do exist can be explained by factors of size and structure of governance within countries. Thus in the Australian states where additional ‘regulatory’ and complaints handling tasks have been created, they have often been given to the PSO on the basis that it is inefficient to create new institutions. By contrast, in the UK, the general practice has been to create specialised new bodies when new tasks need to be performed, a solution justified by the scale of governance in the UK. Nevertheless,

the Australian integration trend could be replicated in the UK where, for instance, the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body is currently considering changes to the bodies supported by the Parliament, which includes the Ombudsman.

One area where the UK and Ireland PSO appear to be ahead of Australasian PSO is in taking human rights issues into account in their investigations. This development is timely given that Convention institutions have called for national ombudsmen to do more to help reduce the backlog of human rights cases.

In all the countries investigated, the redress methods used now regularly encompass techniques of alternative dispute resolution and more emphasis is placed on improving the experience of the complainant than previously. A number of PSO have also begun to focus more on promoting good administrative practice and investigating systemic instances of maladministration.

During the project statutory expression was given to the government’s current administrative justice policy (Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007). This policy aspires (a) to view holistically all of the avenues of redress - ‘putting it right’ - and (b) to increase the potential within the system to learn lessons from redress – ‘getting it right’. Both of these objectives are key roles of PSO in all of the countries studied. PSO are also capable of facilitating flexibility within the administrative justice system because they tend to have a good appreciation of other avenues of redress and have an inherent discretion either to accept or reject complaints on the basis of the appropriateness of other available redress routes. We found that the growing importance of the PSO has been recognised in the UK by bringing them into the jurisdiction of the reformed Administrative Justice

and Tribunals Council (AJTC). But although the AJTC has an important role to play in building awareness of administrative justice, it is only an advisory body and has to liaise with government, where the distribution of responsibilities for the different components of the administrative justice system is uncoordinated.

Our recommendations for reform include: n a government-led review of

the ombudsman community is undertaken as soon as practicably possible;

n remove the MP/MLA filter requirement for complaints to the Parliamentary Ombudsman and Northern Ireland Assembly Ombudsman;

n implement the 2004 reform proposals to integrate the two PSO in Northern Ireland;

n revise the accountability arrangements for the local government ombudsmen;

n all UK ombudsmen should devote more resources to research and developing the link between ‘putting individual complaints right’ to ‘getting decision-making right first time around’;

n expand co-operation and co-ordination in administrative justice;

n improve awareness, including introducing a right to good administration/administrative justice as part of a British Bill of Rights and Responsibilities;

n allow for ‘careful’ experimentation of ombudsman powers, particularly the power of own initiative investigation.

Our dissemination activities have been aimed at both the academic and practitioner communities, and have included presentations at several conferences and the publication of a series of articles. The culmination of this project will be the publication in 2010 of a book, The Ombudsman Enterprise and Administrative Justice (Ashgate).

The Ombudsman Enterprise and Administrative Justice: an academic viewpoint

Brian Thompson


Jane Hingston has been with the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) since it came into being in 2000, when she was appointed to its panel of ombudsmen. But her association with financial dispute resolution dates back to 1991, when she left her career in the Building Societies movement to join the Office of the Banking Ombudsman (one of the predecessor schemes to the FOS).

At that time, she was one of the first non-lawyers to be appointed to a case-handling role in the organisation and her work focussed on mediation and informal settlement – then a relatively new development for ombudsman schemes.

In the years that followed, Jane oversaw the expansion of the Banking Ombudsman new complaints function as the organisation grew. Her interest in early, informal settlement developed at that time. When the UK Government decided in 1997 that there would be a new, unified financial complaints service, she chaired the working party assembled from the original financial ombudsman schemes to identify best complaint-handling practice and create the blueprint for the FOS complaint-handling process. By then, she had been appointed as an Assistant Ombudsman.

During the transition to the new Service, Jane additionally served as joint Building Societies Ombudsman before taking her place as a member of the FOS panel of ombudsmen.

In 2005, Jane was appointed Lead Ombudsman for banking and credit - an area that covers a wide diversity of activities from traditional banking and lending to debt collecting and debt advice. Her combination of credentials (degrees in Law and in Financial Services, and Chartered Banker qualification) provides her with a good grounding to deal with the range and scope of complaints dealt with in her area. It is the wide variety of complaints and complainants, she says, that has kept her interest over the years she has been associated with financial dispute resolution.

Her work as a lead ombudsman has meant more time spent on policy and strategic issues. Amongst other things, Jane currently contributes to the Government’s Consumer Finance Forum, the All Party Parliamentary Group on Credit Unions, and the Islamic Finance Group. She has advised on the handling of financial services complaints in Lithuania, Latvia and Armenia.

Having just been appointed to the BIOA Executive Committee, Jane is looking forward to much greater involvement with the work of the Association – a particularly interesting time, she feels, as the Association examines its role and thinks about how best to move forward.

ProfilesRuth Marks MBEOlder People’s Commissioner for Wales

Ruth Marks took up her post as the world’s first Older People’s Commissioner on 21st April 2008. The role of Commissioner was established by the Commissioner for Older People (Wales) Act 2006 and is underpinned by the United Nations Principles for Older Persons.

She is independent of government and her role is to champion, promote, safeguard and protect older people in Wales. As Commissioner, she has legal powers to investigate many public bodies in Wales, offering a scrutiny and challenge function.

Ruth’s previous appointments have included Director of RNIB Cymru from 2005-2008, working to help the 100,000 people in Wales with serious sight loss. Before this, she was Chief Executive of Chwarae Teg, the leading Welsh women's economic development agency, from 1999-2005. Both organisations helped Ruth to build a wealth of experience in helping people overcome various obstacles and discrimination that may prevent them from living fulfilling working and private lives. She holds a number of voluntary appointments and was awarded the MBE in the Queen's Birthday Honours 2007 for services to welfare to work.

With a professional career including human resource and change management, equality and diversity management, corporate social responsibility and business development, Ruth has the diversity of experience to tackle the many challenges being the world’s first Older People’s Commissioner will inevitably involve.

“There are over 600,000 older people in Wales today, and as we are living longer and healthier lives, these figures are set to increase significantly. Older people make a huge contribution to Welsh life and that needs to be appreciated and acknowledged. This is the first time a role has been solely dedicated to supporting older people’s issues and I feel privileged to have this opportunity to forge ahead in tackling some of the major issues and concerns that face older people today.”

Ruth goes on to say that “The views of older people are informing the emerging work of the Commission and will continue to influence our future priorities. We need to remember that while we work to improve the lives of all older people in Wales today, we are also planning for all our tomorrows.”

Jane Hingston Lead Ombudsman (for banking and credit), UK Financial Ombudsman Service

It would be tempting to assume that the role of ombudsmen across the world fits broadly along the same,

quietly assertive lines: overseeing the investigation of complaints concerning improper or unjust government actions. However, whilst BIOA members concern themselves with the minutiae of public (mal)administration and the intricacies of public service (mis)delivery, the remit of other ombudsmen can extend to rather more high profile subjects.

The official title of the Georgian Ombudsman, ‘The Public Defender of Georgia’, anticipates the drama surrounding the present incumbent and the politically potent purpose of his role.

Established by Parliamentary decree in 1997, the holder of the office of the Public Defender of Georgia is elected for a term of five years by a majority of the Parliament of Georgia. Obliged to follow the Constitution and Laws of Georgia, the Public Defender must also adhere to the universally recognised principles and rules of international law, treaties and agreements concluded by Georgia.

Whilst human rights principles underpin, rather than direct, the work of BIOA members, the sole purpose of the Georgian Ombudsman is to act as a national human rights institution. In line with Georgia’s ambition to strengthen its democratic credentials and gain membership of the EU and NATO, the Public Defender aims to supervise the protection of human rights, restore violated rights and encourage better understanding of human rights within the population. The office holder is also tasked with constructing a favourable environment for the better realisation of human rights in Georgia, supervising the activities of public authorities, officials and legal persons and evaluating all legislation passed by them.

Between 2005 and 2008, the Public Defender received 7,796 complaints concerning violations of human rights and published nine general and five

special reports on the state of human rights in Georgia. At present it is focusing particularly on the human rights of disabled persons and is conducting a series of seminars targeting providers of disability services and the parents of disabled children.

The Office of the Public Defender also houses several centres focused on targeting particular human rights issues. The Centre for Children’s Rights, for example, was established in 2001 and bases its activities on the principles of the UN Convention on Children’s Rights.

A ‘Tolerance Centre’ was established in 2006 with the assistance of the UN Development Program (UNDP) and the support of the Norwegian Government. The centre aims to strengthen the activities of the Public Defender’s Office, support the creation of a tolerant, just, equal and peaceful environment and fight against discrimination on religious and ethnic basis.

The Public Defender’s Office considers itself ‘the leading human rights protection institution in the country, enjoying a very high level of public trust according to public opinion polls’. However, the current incumbent’s actions have prompted challenges to his Office’s claim to ‘impartiality’ and ‘independence’.

Sozar Subari was elected Human Rights Ombudsman in September 2004 for a five-year term and immediately began investigating some of the more controversial court verdicts of preceding years. He subsequently incurred repeated criticism: some opposition politicians and NGOs distrust his former

association with President Saakashvili and rebuke him for not taking a tough enough stance on abuses; whilst the pro-Saakashvili parliamentary majority accuse him of abusing his authority.

In November 2007 Subari was widely quoted in the Georgian media following the violent suppression of peaceful demonstrations in Tbilisi. He reported witnessing the police beating fleeing demonstrators and claimed that when be began remonstrating with officers he himself was beaten and verbally abused, despite disclosing his position of office. Subari later called the police action ‘illegal’ and he released an open letter warning that failure to combat elite corruption, police violence and human rights abuses would result in civil unrest. In September 2008 he announced the creation of a new umbrella organisation, ‘Public Movement for Liberty and Justice’, with which several prominent opposition politicians have already aligned. Whilst Subari claims the organisation is ‘an informal, open association…[which] is not a political party and does not seek to come into power’, it may be increasingly difficult for him to deny that his independence and impartiality have been, and continue to be, compromised by his strong political actions and commentary.

Given the fledgling status of Georgian democracy and its poor human rights record, it is difficult to know whether the Public Defender’s political prominence is necessarily harmful. In his vocal criticism of human rights abuses and his ability to advance a populist campaign seeking to advance freedom and justice Subari may be aiding Georgia’s journey to democracy. Moreover, in his very public denouncement of clearly unjust government action he is perhaps cementing and enhancing the power of his Office. As such, the Public Defender of Georgia raises important questions about the role of ombudsmen across the world.

Public Defender, GeorgiaBy Gabby Crane, Communications Officer, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Sozar Subari, Public Defender of Georgia



‘Ombudsman’a confusing concept? By Mike Reddy, Deputy Adjudicator, The Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education

I have attended three international ombudsman conferences so far this

year. Lucky me! One was in Hamburg and concerned European ombudsmen in higher education1; one was in Montreal and was attended by a very diverse group of US and Canadian ombudsmen2 and finally the BIOA Conference at Warwick, where we did some soul searching. All three were themed along the lines of building upon the legacy of the first Swedish ombudsman 200 years ago, and were excellent. But all three conferences raised important issues about what it means to be an ombudsman in the 21st century.

What seems to be emerging is the growing confusion over the most basic question – what is an ombudsman? It is a question of international significance as ombudsmen schemes of all types continue to take root around the world. Those of us who work in ombudsman schemes may think we know what an ombudsman is but is there any sense of a shared understanding by the public of our role?

At BIOA the debate centres on whether there should be different categories of membership depending on the level of independence, effectiveness, accountability, etc the scheme is able to demonstrate3. But if associate membership

status is to remain what are the public to make of these ‘unrecognised’ complaint handling schemes? Given that many of these schemes will continue to use the word ‘ombudsman’ in their title, the public is entitled to be a little confused. And, of course, there are some organisations and individuals who call themselves ‘ombudsman’ but are quite oblivious to the good practice exhortations of BIOA. So ‘ombudsman’ may have become a very amorphous term in the UK4.

In Montreal I was reminded that in North America the rapid growth of ombudsmen has not been in the public sector, nor indeed in sector wide schemes. It has been in the area of executive and organisational ombudsmen. These are ombudsmen who work within a single organisation, often dealing solely with internal issues. Their role is essentially to improve communications within the organisation, to listen to complaints and make suggestions for resolving conflict. They almost never carry out investigations and their independence is sometimes called into question. Their work is completely confidential and no records are kept. Clearly these are not the sort of ombudsmen we see at BIOA conferences; but then they do not aspire to be classical ombudsmen.

I am a big fan of organisational ombudsmen

though. They play a very valuable conflict resolution role. Indeed in some ways their development is as significant as that of classical ombudsmen. They can be found in many large institutions all over the world playing a pivotal role in preventing the escalation of complaints. They work in corporations, banks, international agencies and even in hospitals and universities. Many of them subscribe to a code of ethics. At the OIA we (and the National Union of Students) have encouraged universities in England and Wales to look at the campus ombudsman model operating in much of North America, Europe and Australia to facilitate the early resolution of complaints5.

But they are not real ombudsmen are they? Well here is the rub. In the USA organisational ombudsmen have eclipsed the classical ombudsmen concept6. The International Ombudsman Association (IOA), an organisation of mainly US organisational ombudsmen (including many university ombudsmen) is the largest ombudsman association in North America7. Among other things its standards of practice require that its members do not participate in formal investigations, nor adjudicate; and that submissions are made in confidence – requirements that would normally be abhorrent to classical ombudsmen. This is not

just a US phenomenon, however: the IOA runs training programmes around the world. And it has just embarked upon an accreditation programme involving adherence to its standards of practice.

Perhaps then the public should assume that there are now two distinct types of ombudsman8? Well, in Canada there seems also to be a middle path with hybrid schemes combining elements of both models. Campus ombudsmen, for example, usually have full investigatory powers and they publish annual reports, with case studies9.

In the UK organisational ombudsmen are light on the ground. But the introduction of campus ombudsmen may change this10. Currently there are no standards or codes of practice to safeguard the office holder or service users. Is there a role for BIOA here? Or will these twilight creations add to the confusion as to what is an ombudsman?

References1 7th European Network for Ombudsmen in Higher Education Annual

Conference 2009, www.english.uva.nl/enohe

2 Evolution of the Ombudsman: A Rich History, A Promising Future – Joint Conference of ACCUO, FCO and IOA 2009

3 The Ombudsman Issue 37 April 2009

4 In the Republic of Ireland, the Ombudsman (Amendment) Bill 2008 proposes to restrict the use of the word ‘ombudsman’ (Section 15)

5 OIA Annual Report 2006

6 see The American distortion of the ombudsman concept and its influence on Canada by Rowatt, Donald C Canadian Public Administration 50.1 (Spring 2007) for a lucid account of how this happened

7 www.ombudsassociation.org

8 The American Bar Association actually recognises three different ombudsmen categories: classical, organisational and advocate ombudsmen!

9 See for example www.mcmaster.ca/ombuds/

10 Northumbria University and the University of Teesside both have recently established ombudsman offices. A few universities also refer to officials ‘acting like ombudsmen’


Richard Walter explains how the NHS Complaints Personnel Association Scotland (NCPAS), which provides a networking service in Scotland for complaints handlers and colleagues, could be spreading its wings. Richard has chaired NCPAS for six years.

The history of NCPASThe NHS Complaints Association Scotland (NCAS) was ‘born’ in late 1999 when a decision was taken by the then NHS Trust and Board Complaints Officers to set up a similar group to the now disbanded UK-wide National Association of Complaints Personnel (NACP). The name NCAS was changed to NCPAS in 2007 to avoid confusion with the National Clinical Assessment Service and to make it clear that the Association represented ‘personnel’ working in complaints handling.

The Association is not formally constituted (although we do have a remit) and there is a small annual membership fee from NHS Boards to pay

for basic expenses and setting up of conferences and the like.

It recognises the need for consistency of information about the complaints procedure and the need for a single voice in providing feedback to evaluate its effectiveness. The Association now comprises a wide membership principally from NHS organisations but also from the Care Commission, General Medical Council, Scottish Public Services Ombudsman’s Office,

Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, Citizens Advice Scotland and the Scottish Government. We also link closely with our Social Work colleagues.

NCPAS has been involved in all the important consultations around the NHS complaints procedure and supported a number of national conferences as well as organising two of its own.

Expanding the networkOur network has now increased beyond those local organisations to others such as the Department of Health, National Complaints Managers Group for Social Care, ComplaintsRGreat and several Ombudsman offices.

We have discussed some initially very simple ways our NCPAS network could spread into other parts of the UK through adapting similar formats for ‘requests for information’ and sharing ideas with other groups in areas of good

practice. More joint ventures could follow. Although we are bound by different legislation, there are many common aims.

A website seems the next logical step – providing links into existing sites and pointing people in the right direction of colleagues in other organisations who may have some valuable thoughts. To share ideas and for further information, please email [email protected].

Health complaintsa support and sharing network

By Jo Fainlight, Interim Communications Manager, PHSO

An independent report ‘Six lives: the provision of public services to people with learning disabilities’ was published in March of this year by the Health Service

Ombudsman and the Local Government Ombudsman. This was a joint investigation and the report was produced by Ann Abraham, Health Service Ombudsman and Jerry White, Local Government Ombudsman, as three of the cases spanned both health and social care.

The report responded to complaints, brought by the charity Mencap, on behalf of the families of six people with learning disabilities who died whilst in NHS or local authority care between 2003 and 2005. The cases were first brought to public attention in Mencap’s 2007 report ‘Death by Indifference’. Following extensive investigations both Ombudsmen uncovered failings and offered a series of recommendations.

The Ombudsmen recommended that NHS bodies and councils urgently confront whether they have the correct systems and culture in place to protect individuals with learning disabilities from discrimination, in line with existing laws and guidance.

Speaking about the ‘Six lives’ report, Ann Abraham said:“The recurrence of complaints across different agencies

leads us to believe that the quality of care in the NHS and

By Nick O’Brien, BIOA Project Consultant

There has never been more urgent need for ombudsman schemes to

command credibility with their stakeholders and for their staff to demonstrate their professional credentials. As the ombudsman ‘brand’ consolidates, so individual expectations rise and public scrutiny increases. At the same time, those working in ombudsman schemes encounter a contracting jobs market and heightened demands upon their expertise. On behalf of its members, BIOA has responded to the challenge by facilitating the delivery by Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, of a pilot training course in ombudsman

practice, to commence in October 2009.

As with any ‘pilot’ initiative, there is an experimental aspect to this initiative. The lessons learned will inform the future development of training and of BIOA’s role in it. Once, in the light of the pilot experience, BIOA has settled the core content of the training, it will be open to other providers, including in-house training departments of ombudsman schemes themselves, to seek validation and so deliver validated training to staff.

The pilot course is expected to comprise two stages: an ‘award’ (4 days: 6-9 October 2009) in ombudsman practice, covering topics such as:

Real lives

Roll Up, Roll Up for the Ombudsman Practice Course

social services for people with learning disabilities is at best patchy and at worst an indictment of our society….‘Six lives’ has highlighted distressing failures in the quality of health and social care services for people with learning disabilities. No investigation can reverse the mistakes and failures but if NHS and social care leaders take positive steps to deliver improvements in services, this may bring some small consolation to the families and carers of those who died.”

The Ombudsmen made three key recommendations:

First, that all NHS and social care organisations in England should review urgently:n the effectiveness of the systems they have in place to

enable them to understand and plan to meet the full range of needs of people with learning disabilities in their areas; and n the capacity and capability of the services they provide

and/or commission for their local populations to meet the additional and often complex needs of people with learning disabilities; and should report accordingly to those responsible for the governance of those organisations within 12 months of the publication of the Ombudsmen’s report.Secondly, that those responsible for the regulation of

health and social care services (specifically the Care Quality Commission, Monitor and the Equality and Human Rights Commission) should satisfy themselves, individually and jointly,

that the approach taken in their regulatory frameworks and performance monitoring regimes provides effective assurance that health and social care organisations are meeting their statutory and regulatory requirements in relation to the provision of services to people with learning disabilities; and that they should report accordingly to their respective Boards within 12 months of the publication of the Ombudsmen’s report.

Thirdly, that the Department of Health should promote and support the implementation of these recommendations, monitor progress against them and publish a progress report within 18 months of the publication of the Ombudsmen’s report.

The report identified maladministration, service failure and unremedied injustice in a number, but not all, of the 20 bodies

investigated (three councils, 16 NHS bodies and the Healthcare Commission).

The Ombudsmen found that many organisations compounded their failures by poor handling of the complaints made against them and by a reluctance to offer apologies. Most of the bodies concerned have since apologised for their mishandling of the families’ initial complaints and have provided information on improvements they have made. Financial compensation has also been offered.

To access the report, visit www.ombudsman.org.uk/news/press_releases/pr2009_02.html

n Complaint Assessment and standards

n Law, evidence and procedure

n Communication, evidence gathering and interviewing

n Decision-making, recommendations, report writing;

and a ‘certificate’ (5 days:

1-5 February 2010) in ombudsman practice, covering topics such as:n Ombudsmen: the historical

and political contextn Alternative dispute

resolutionn Conflict managementn Data management and data

protection

n Personal work planning and management.

In addition to attendance at face-to-face training, delegates will be expected to commit time to background reading and to the completion of assignments. Registration for the pilot ‘award’ will cost £1,000 and of the ‘certificate’ £1,250. For those registering for both the pilot award and the certificate there is a discount rate of £2,000.

The pilot is aimed primarily at those working in the assessment and investigative functions of conventional ombudsman schemes. Its purpose will be to equip assessors and investigators with the practical skills and background knowledge necessary to discharge those functions to a high level

of competence. To ensure maximum effectiveness of the pilot, places will be limited in the first instance to 20 delegates, drawn as far as possible from a wide range of schemes.

No short course can accommodate the distinctive features of each and every scheme. The award and certificate will not, in other words, replace the need for all scheme-specific training or on-the-job learning. The pilot is, however, prefaced by the assumption that most ombudsmen and related complaints-handling schemes have enough in common to justify a shared approach to core professional training. Just as lawyers, for example, claim an area of general

Roll Up, Roll Up for the Ombudsman Practice Course

Continued on page 16

Queen Margaret University Campus



Editorial Board – Emma Gray (Editor) Communications and Outreach Manager, Scottish Public Services Ombudsman ([email protected]) Ian Pattison Secretary, British and Irish Ombudsman Association ([email protected]) Andrew Bradley Communications Manager, The Ombudsman Service Limited ([email protected]) Jo Fainlight Interim Communications Manager, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman ([email protected]) Jackie Feeney Head of Communications, Local Government Ombudsman ([email protected]) Alison Hoyland Consumer and Parliamentary Liaison, Financial

Ombudsman Service (alison.hoyland@financial-

ombudsman.org.uk) Caroline Mitchell Ombudsman,

Financial Ombudsman Service (caroline.mitchell@

financial-ombudsman.org.uk) Marie O’Brien

Investigator, Information Commissioner’s Office,

Ireland (marie_o’[email protected]) Nick O’Brien Legal Policy Consultant (nick.obrien@ntlworld.

com) Rafael Runco Deputy Housing Ombudsman

([email protected])

The Ombudsman is published three times a year

by the British and Irish Ombudsman Association

to inform members of the association. The views

expressed in The Ombudsman are not necessarily those of the Association or the Editorial Board and the views and information it contains are not intended to give specific advice and should not be relied upon as such. The Association believes that the information contained in The Ombudsman is correct at the time of going to press but no responsibility can be accepted for any errors or omissions.

British & IrishOmbudsman Association,PO Box 308, Twickenham, TW1 9BE.www.bioa.org.uk

expertise that is refined by further specialist training and practice, so ombudsman practitioners might expect to stake a claim to distinctive but shared expertise, whilst acknowledging that those working in any given area will also need to acquire specialist knowledge and practice to enable them to apply those generic skills effectively.

That assumption is warranted by the very existence of BIOA. As BIOA’s Guide to Principles of Good Complaint Handling, published in 2007, makes clear, although its membership covers large and small schemes, public and private sector, national and local, statutory

and voluntary, all share involvement in complaint handling and all seek to resolve disputes. Just as importantly, all aspire to the BIOA values of independence of judgment, fairness and impartiality, effectiveness and accountability.

It is that common ground that enabled BIOA some years ago to define its 12 core complaint-handling standards or ‘competencies’ for investigative staff, ranging from ‘assessment’ to ‘effective investigation’, from ‘reaching and acting on findings’ to ‘providing a high impact service’, from ‘operating within legal and procedural frameworks’ to ‘communicating effectively’, ‘producing clear, unambiguous written documents’, managing information and resources effectively and securely, and ‘promoting diversity’. These are the core competencies that

have informed the content of the pilot course.

This is a new departure for BIOA, with very little available internationally in the way of comparison or models to emulate. BIOA is not a professional regulatory body. It cannot therefore seek to accredit or certify the professional competence of individual members. What it can do, however, is define the key components of acceptable training to award and certificate levels, validate training courses that cover those components, and grant awards and certificates to those individuals who satisfactorily complete a validated course.

That measure of BIOA engagement does not entail a fundamental change of purpose. It does, however, mean that those who avail themselves of the training can demonstrate a measure of objective achievement and

of professional certification in the field of ombudsman practice. It also means that BIOA itself, and its members, can take the lead in capturing and disseminating what is best about the distinctive ombudsman approach to complaint handling, and so benefit not just ombudsman schemes and their staff but, critically, all those who use their services. This is to that extent a unique opportunity to help shape the next stage in ombudsman evolution.

Booking forms and further information about the QMU pilot course can be obtained from Carol Brennan at [email protected].

Course details and application forms are also on the BIOA website (www.bioa.org.uk). Please note that the closing date for applications for the ‘Award’ course is 14 August.

Roll Up, Roll UpContinued from page 15

(Law Commission, England & Wales)

n Marian Shanley (Law Reform Commission, Ireland)

Workshops:

n Managing customer expectationsn Accreditationn Training for bodies under jurisdiction

6th session:Institution of the OmbudsmanChair:

Ann Abraham (UK Parliamentary Ombudsman and Health Service Ombudsman for England)Speakers:

n Albert Johnson (Head of Division, Parliamentary Ombudsman, Sweden)

n Arne Fliflet (Norwegian Parliamentary Ombudsman)

n P. Nikiforos Diamandouros (European Ombudsman)

Workshops:

n Equality of access and the investigation

of discrimination complaints n Unacceptable behaviourn Knowledge ManagementThe Conference took place at Scarman House Conference Centre at the University of Warwick, and over 180 delegates attended.

Reports of the workshops are available on the BIOA website, and also in printed form from the Secretary, Ian Pattison ([email protected]). Copies of the presentations are in the ‘members’ area’ of the website. Access information is provided to staff members of member schemes on request to the Secretary.

Biennial Conference 2009Continued from page 1

Issue 38 August 2009 Biennial Conference · 6 Super troupers ‘Fernando’ takes a lighter look at the BIOA Conference 8 Write like a Barbarian? Some civilised advice 9 Spotlight

Documents