• You are here:
• Home /
• Publications /
• Annual Reports /
• Annual Report of the Ombudsman 1996

Annual Report of the Ombudsman 1996

Chapter Two - The Year's Work

Number of Complaints

During 1996 I received a total of 3,181 complaints compared to a total of 2,879 complaints the previous year. This represented an increase of 10.5% in the number of complaints received. Of these, 645 were outside my remit leaving a balance of 2,536 valid complaints. If a case cannot be dealt with by my Office, every effort is made to direct the complainant to some other service which might provide assistance or information. In addition to the new complaints I received, there was a carry over of 878 complaints from 1995 resulting in a case load of 3,414 to be dealt with in 1996. During the year, 2,466 of these were brought to a conclusion leaving a balance of 948 to be carried forward to 1997.

Of the 2,466 cases finalised in 1996, 444 were resolved and in 547 cases assistance was provided which means that in 991 (over 40%) of cases some form of redress was obtained for the complainant. A total of 943 complaints was not upheld and a further 532 cases were either discontinued or withdrawn by the complainant.

In terms of the overall breakdown of complaints within my jurisdiction dealt with during the year, 48.5% concerned civil service departments and offices. Of these 50.5% involved the Department of Social Welfare, 19.5% concerned the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry and 11% were against the Revenue Commissioners. Of the remaining 51.5% of complaints, 22.5% involved local authorities, 16% related to health boards, 11% concerned Telecom �ireann and 2% An Post.

Staff

I want to express my appreciation for the commitment, hard work and professionalism of all my staff throughout the year. A special word of thanks is due to Tom Morgan for his excellent work in preparing this Annual Report.

My staff and I were shocked and saddened by the sudden death of our colleague Sabina Conway, during the Christmas holiday period. Sabina was one of the longest serving members of my Office and she was well known for her commitment and interest in her work on behalf of complainants, especially in the area of social welfare in which she had a particular expertise. She also displayed the same qualities towards those who worked with her and was a source of great guidance and support to them. She is a great loss and will be fondly remembered by all of us. May she
rest in peace.

Public Access and Awareness

The level of awareness among the public about the existence and role of my Office is a matter of continuing importance to me. I am about to engage market research consultants to carry out a nation-wide survey of public awareness of my Office.

During 1996 my Office paid monthly visits to Citizens Information Centres in Galway, Waterford, Cork and Limerick and to the Tallaght Partnership Company. Over the year there were 443 callers to these centres. I would like to thank all those involved including the National Social Service Board and the Citizens Information Centres for their continued support and assistance in publicising these services.

Because of the small number of callers to the Tallaght centre, it was necessary to discontinue that service after a trial period of 12 months. I was very surprised by the lack of demand from the Tallaght area despite considerable local advertising on radio and by leaflet.

Needless to say, I remain convinced that many people in that area are in need of the services of my Office but, for a variety of reasons, it has not been possible to reach them. The resources I have to spend on publicity and advertising are limited and television advertising is too expensive. I am examining a range of initiatives aimed at making my Office more accessible to people in the greater Dublin area.

Outside the major urban centres, there appears to be a greater awareness of my Office. One or two day regional visits were paid to Kilkenny, Portlaoise, Castlebar, Donegal and Tralee and a total of 403 people attended. Advertising on local radio and information leaflets delivered to households in the area clearly had an effect here. In fact, during 1996 my Office arranged the delivery of information leaflets to 9.8% of all residential households in the country.

Information on my Office, including details of the planned programme of Regional and Citizens Information Centre visits for 1997 is published on the Internet (url:http://www.irlgov.ie/ombudsman/)

Strategic Management Initiative (SMI)

In the course of 1996, my staff and I prepared a Statement of Strategy for the period 1997-1999. The statement sets out what we see as the principal strategic challenges facing the Office in the next three years and identifies four key objectives designed to meet those challenges. The key objectives relate to the independence of the Office, public access to the Office, the fairness of the complaints examination service we provide, and the effectiveness of that service. The strategies which the Office intends to pursue in order to meet these objectives are also outlined together with the performance indicators which we will use to gauge our progress in meeting the objectives.

The statement will greatly assist each member of my staff to identify his or her individual job objectives. It has also presented me with the opportunity to state my own personal objectives for the Office of the Ombudsman.

"During the course of my tenure, the Office of the Ombudsman, with the support of the Oireachtas, will aim to: strengthen its independence and powers; develop a comprehensive remit across the public service; achieve a high level of public awareness of the existence and function of the Office; continue to earn the respect and co-operation of the agencies within remit; and, by providing feedback to these agencies, contribute to the improvement of standards of public administration."

Progress was also made on a number of other strategic management issues. A pilot client survey was completed which provided useful information on how we can improve our services to our complainants. The response rate was 37% and approximately 67% of those who replied were happy that their complaint had been examined fairly. One of the areas highlighted for improvement was that of public awareness - 35% felt that the existence of the Office was not well publicised. I intend to carry out regular surveys of this kind in the future. Following extensive consultation, a performance assessment scheme for all staff was developed and will be implemented in 1997. A project involving the redesign of the Office's information systems will result in a more effective complaints examination service from 1997 onwards.

Within the context of the Government's initiative on strategic management "Delivering Better Government", my Office contributed to the Working Group on Open and Transparent Service Delivery and to the Front-line Group on Quality Customer Service. These were two of a number of groups established by the SMI Co-ordinating Group.

Constitution Review Group

An All-Party Committee on the Constitution was established by the Government in July 1996 to review those areas where constitutional change might be desirable or necessary. In doing so, the Committee was to have regard, among other things, to the Report of the Constitution Review Group.

In a submission to the Committee, I welcomed the recommendation of the Review Group that a new article should be inserted in the Constitution confirming the establishment of the Office of the Ombudsman and providing for the independent exercise of the functions of the Office. Such constitutional guarantee for this independence would, I said, reinforce freedom from conflict of interest, from deference to the executive and from influence by special interest groups.

I referred to the Review Group's proposal for a Human Rights Commission with legislative status to maintain an overview of the extent to which human rights are protected at both the constitutional and legal levels in this jurisdiction. In many other jurisdictions, the institution of Ombudsman has an important role to play in relation to the protection of fundamental human rights and I suggested that the Committee might like to consider how the proposed Human Rights Commission could relate, not only to the courts, but also to the Office of the Ombudsman.

I also drew attention to the Review Group's recommendation that consideration be given to an amendment to Article 15.2.1�. so that the Oireachtas should have power to authorise, by law, the delegation of power to either the government or a minister to legislate, using the mechanism of a statutory instrument. There are many areas of citizens' rights which are governed by the provisions of statutory instruments. This delegated or secondary legislation is not subject to the same level of scrutiny as primary legislation on passage through the Oireachtas. Indeed, many instruments merely require to be laid before the Oireachtas to bring them into effect. In my submission, I said I was somewhat concerned at the consequences of this so-called democratic deficit. I suggested that the Committee consider whether the Office of the Ombudsman should have (a) a role in assisting the Oireachtas in ensuring that the proposed Article 15.2.1� contains all of the appropriate safeguards and (b) specifically defined powers in relation to complaints where delegated legislation has had an adverse effect.

I have also offered to meet the Committee to discuss the contents of my submission.

Freedom of Information

The Freedom of Information Act will come into operation in April 1998. It will provide individuals with a legal right of access to information held by public bodies, with certain exceptions to provide for circumstances where access would be likely to be harmful to key interests of the State or personal privacy.

In cases where access to information is refused, delayed or curtailed, the legislation provides for an appeal to an independent Information Commissioner. I have accepted an invitation to be nominated by the Government as Ireland's first Information Commissioner. In common with the practice in many other countries, the intention is that I would hold office as both Information Commissioner and as Ombudsman. In carrying out investigations, the Commissioner will be entitled to examine documents and to summon witnesses. He will be empowered to issue binding decisions which will be appealable to the High Court. The Commissioner will also conduct reviews of the Freedom of Information legislation and will be mandated to report on the operation of the legislation generally and on compliance by public bodies with its provisions.

Government Plans for the Office

In last year's report I said that an Ombudsman (Amendment) Bill was being prepared to extend the powers and remit of my Office to the non-commercial state bodies and the public voluntary hospitals. I also referred to the Government's proposals for an Administrative Procedures Bill which would set down for public bodies minimum response times for dealing with correspondence, the level of guidance to be given to the public and the basis for decisions and information on rights of appeal. It was also intended that the Ombudsman would have a monitoring role under the proposed Act.

I am sorry to have to report that little or no progress has been made in relation to either bill. Indeed, I am particularly disappointed and concerned at the lack of progress on the Ombudsman (Amendment) Bill and I have written to this effect to the Department of Finance which has responsibility for preparing the draft legislation.

I should also mention that, in addition to extending my remit, it was intended that the Ombudsman (Amendment) Bill would provide for a strengthening of my powers and many of these proposals were first put to the Department as far back as 1987.

I regard it as extremely important that bodies such as F�S, the public voluntary hospitals, the Vocational Education Committees and the Health and Safety Authority are brought within my remit as quickly as possible. Indeed, when my Office was established, many of the functions which are now vested in F�S and the Health and Safety Authority were within my remit as they were, at that time, the responsibility of the old Department of Labour.

Without prejudice to the proposed timetable for the Ombudsman (Amendment) Bill and in order to expedite matters, I have suggested to the Department of Finance that immediate consideration be given to bringing these public bodies within my remit. This could be done by amending the Schedules to the Ombudsman Act by Order in accordance with Section 4(10). The Schedules could be amended relatively quickly given that consultation with the relevant Departments has already taken place in the context of the proposals for an Ombudsman (Amendment Bill).

Relations with Public Bodies within Remit

With a view to disseminating information about the work of my Office, I gave a number of talks to public officials and other interested parties in the course of the year.

To mark the visit of the European Ombudsman, Mr Jacob S�derman, to Dublin in March 1996, I addressed a seminar organised by the Irish Council of the European Movement. Later in the year, I was a guest speaker at an international conference in Dublin organised by the same group on the subject of European citizenship.

I presented papers to the Convention on Quality in Local Government organised by the Department of the Environment and to a conference on Quality in Health Care organised by the Quality Assurance in Nursing Association. Information and the public service was the subject of a presentation I made to an Eastern Health Board seminar. Finally, in anticipation of the proposed extension of my remit, I accepted an invitation to address the annual conference of the Association of Chief Executives of State Agencies.

With the co-operation of the public bodies within my remit, I hope to distribute my information leaflet on the Ombudsman's guide to standards of best practice (see Introduction) to all public officials in those bodies.

The European Ombudsman

The evolving relationship between the European Ombudsman and national Ombudsmen is one which I value as it strengthens the opportunity for Irish citizens, as citizens of Europe, to air their grievances against those Community institutions or bodies which are within the European Ombudsman's remit. I was invited by Mr S�derman to present a paper to a seminar in Strasbourg in September 1996 which explored ways of promoting co-operation between the European Ombudsman and national Ombudsmen and similar bodies in the member states of the European Union.

The European Ombudsman does not have jurisdiction over national Ombudsmen of the member states and he is not an avenue of appeal against their decisions. Neither is he empowered to investigate complaints against, say, an Irish Department of State for failure to implement a particular European Union law. Such a complaint would, of course, come within my jurisdiction. However, there are complaints which lie beyond the boundaries of a national Ombudsman's remit and yet may not readily come to the attention of the European Ombudsman. This was one of a number of issues which I addressed in my paper to the Strasbourg seminar. For example, it may happen that both a Department of State and the European Commission may be agreed on a particular interpretation of European Union law but the complainant and I may disagree with it. It is not open to me as a national Ombudsman to pursue such a complaint with the Commission. Equally, it may not be satisfactory to ask the complainant to raise the matter directly with the Commission, after my Office may have already completed a lengthy examination of the case.

Among other things, the seminar agreed that a national Ombudsman could refer such complaints directly to the European Ombudsman who, in turn, would pursue them with the Commission. This has the advantage of removing the requirement on the complainant to start the complaint process all over again after he or she has exhausted the procedures at national level. It is also beneficial to the complainant to have the national Ombudsman act, in effect, as a "sponsor" of his or her complaint at Community institution level.

National Ombudsmen and similar bodies of the member states have now appointed liaison officers who will meet the European Ombudsman in June 1997 to develop further co-operation arrangements.

It has also been agreed that national Ombudsmen would devote a separate section of their annual report to complaints involving European Union law. While I outlined one such case in my 1995 Annual Report, no similar case arose during 1996.

The creation of the Office of European Ombudsman, together with the co-operation arrangements now being put in place, have an important role to play in ensuring the full protection of the rights of citizens of the European Union.

Contact with other Ombudsman Offices

In October 1996, I attended the International Conference of the International Ombudsman Institute in Buenos Aires, which is held every four years. I was particularly honoured to be elected a member of the Board of Directors of the International Ombudsman Institute. This reflects the international recognition my Office has managed to achieve by its work over the years. The Institute has Ombudsmen from 86 countries among its membership and its main aims are the promotion and the development of the concept of the Ombudsman.
Among those who visited the Office in 1996 were the United Kingdom Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, who spoke to my staff about his recently widened jurisdiction; the Northern Ireland Ombudsman; the deputy to the Ombudsman of Hong Kong; the Ombudsman of Western Australia; the European Ombudsman; a delegation from the British House of Lords and the Mexican Ambassador to Ireland.

My Office also contributed to a number of subcommittees of the British and Irish Ombudsman Association and a member of my staff, Matt Merrigan, is the editor of the Association's newsletter "The Ombudsman".

Protection of the term "Ombudsman"

My Office was represented on a subcommittee of the British and Irish Ombudsman Association (BIOA) which reviewed the rules of the Association and the criteria for membership. The Association is concerned to ensure that an applicant using the term "Ombudsman" should not be eligible for voting membership unless he or she meets a number of criteria including that of independence.

This is a general concern which I share. While both the Insurance Ombudsman for Ireland and the Ombudsman for the Credit Institutions also satisfy the BIOA criteria, there are now regular calls in this State to appoint additional Ombudsmen to deal with certain aspects of the public and private sectors. In developing such proposals, it is important to ensure that certain basic criteria are met. The overriding essential requirement for an Ombudsman is that he or she is entirely independent and impartial. Impartiality requires independence and independence, in turn, requires statutory or legal underpinning, security against arbitrary removal, the power to issue and publish reports with the protection of legal privilege and, finally, adequate resources to do the job. There is a real danger that Ombudsmen who do not meet these requirements will devalue the role and standing of those who do.

Ad hoc Commission on Referendum Information

Together with the Clerk of the D�il and the Clerk of the Seanad, I was asked by the Government, in October 1996, to form an Ad hoc Commission on Referendum Information. The purpose of the Commission was to provide information to the public on the issues arising out of the proposal to amend the Constitution in relation to the granting of bail. It invited submissions from the public and supervised the production and publication in national and local newspapers of a bilingual information statement setting out the case for, and the case against, the proposed constitutional amendment. The Commission was assisted by two Senior Counsel nominated by the Chairman of the Bar Council and the secretariat was provided by my Office.

Public Offices Commission.

The functions of the Public Offices Commission, established in November 1995 under the Ethics in Public Office Act, 1995, are set to expand considerably. The members of the Commission are the Ombudsman, the Comptroller and Auditor General, the Ceann Comhairle, (who is currently Chairman), the Clerk of the D�il and the Clerk of the Seanad. My Office provides the secretariat to the Commission.

In 1997, following the making of regulations by the Minister for Finance, the provisions of the Ethics in Public Office Act will apply to persons occupying directorships or designated positions in the state sponsored sector. Previously, the Act applied only to members of the Oireachtas, special advisors and senior civil servants.

The Electoral Bill proposes a role for the Commission in relation to the use of public funding provided for political purposes, disclosure of political donations and control of election expenditure within specified limits.

The Commission reports separately on its activities, as required by Section 27 of the Ethics in Public Office Act, 1995.

Back to contents