What's the Point of the Ombudsman?

That's the question the action group PHSOtheFacts has been asking about the PHSO (Parliamentary and Health Services Ombudsman) for years.

https://phsothetruestory.com/

PHSO doesn't get much positive feedback on TrustPilot either, but the UK government doesn't seem to care much about this or calls for its reform, including from the Parliamentary Committee which scrutinises it, PACAC (Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee).

"The Committee repeats its call for the Government to bring forward Ombudsman reform law, originally drafted by Government seven years ago. According to the report, there is 'widespread consensus' on the need to reduce complexity in the law and to bring the law in line with international best practice. MPs describe the Government’s continued refusal to address the issue as 'unacceptable'."

PACAC Chair William Wragg said, “When individuals are failed by a public service, they deserve the right for their complaint to be heard and any injustice redressed.”

Even outgoing Ombudsman, Rob Behrens, has slammed the government’s approach to complaints, calling for PHSO reform. People are losing their faith in public institutions because there are “too many cover ups, fob-offs and brick walls to navigate.”

One whistleblower, whose evidence has not been made public for PACAC 'scrutinies' of the PHSO, had her concerns about the UK FCDO (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) referred to the PHSO by her then MP, Phillip Hammond, in 2018. The whistleblower alleges that the FCDO, or at least certain of its senior members, has prioritised shielding wealthy and well-connected British ‘offenders’ over transparency and justice in her tentacular whistleblowing case in Geneva. Evidence received by the whistleblower in one week late June 2019, including an internal Cabinet Office email exchange and a letter from HMPPS (His Majesty’s Prisons and Probation Services) seems to support these allegations.

?Between May 2018 and September 2020, at least six PHSO members had looked at her case, including Rob Behrens. One PHSO caseworker disclosed that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office had failed to adjust vulnerability assessments. That same caseworker, who admitted to having researched the fate of whistleblowers in Switzerland, wrote her decision to take complaints to full investigation on 12th March 2020. Within days she sent a letter contradicting the first letter and she apparently left the PHSO within days of that.

The first letter only came to light when the whistleblower was provided with data much later. Data and letters also seemed to reveal that the PHSO may not have followed advice from its legal team, which was also not provided to the whistleblower.

With regard to evidence to support the whistleblower’s complaints, one response from a PHSO caseworker was, “I appreciate you may feel you have evidence that contradicts this but it is increasingly difficult to locate information on our system”.

Complaints were re-written by that caseworker, for the following reason “You made it clear you were unhappy with the summary I had put together during our correspondence at the start of this case. We did give you the opportunity to provide your comments on the summary before we finalised it but ultimately we were unable to structure the summary in the way you wanted.”

It might appear that complaints are being manipulated to water them down, or for easy dismissal.

No explanation has been forthcoming over why data was sent to that PHSO caseworker by a law firm in a confirmed by the ICO (Information Commissioner's Office) data breach.

as recently as February 1st 2024, the ICO wrote that the PHSO had infringed their data protection obligations, in not responding to a SAR (Subject Access Request) dated 13 June 2023 from the whistleblower. The PHSO has already missed the two-week deadline to resolve matters.?

David Hencke in Westminister Confidential reported on April 28th 2021 on how Michael Gove kicked reform of the Parliamentary Ombudsman into the long grass until 2025.

David Hencke in Westminister Confidential has recently written about apparent delays by the Prime Minister in approving a new Ombudsman and potential impacts.

For now, some might feel that the ‘point’ of the Ombudsman is to provide a whitewash service for less than satisfactory services by government departments and certain of their members, at enormous cost to the taxpayer. If this were the case, then what incentive is there for learning and improvements and is this service - as it stands - value for money for the taxpayer?

Perhaps the only reform the government wants is for the Ombudsman to disappears altogether, especially as its report on maladministration in 50s women’s delayed pensions is due soon. WASPI (Women Against State Pension Inequality) have been waiting years for its publication.

https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/327/public-administration-and-constitutional-affairs-committee/news/194562/mps-lament-nhs-and-government-complaints-bodys-lack-of-ambition-to-return-to-prepandemic-service-delivery-levels

https://davidhencke.com/2021/04/28/gove-kicks-reform-of-the-parliamentary-ombudsman-service-into-the-long-grass/

https://davidhencke.com/2024/02/08/rishi-sunak-delays-appointment-of-new-parliamentary-ombudsman-and-throws-the-organisation-into-crisis/

?

?

?

?