• You are here:
• Home /
• Publications /
• Annual Reports /
• Annual Report of the Ombudsman 2000

Annual Report of the Ombudsman 2000

Chapter Five - The year in review

North-South Implementation Bodies

In line with the Belfast Agreement of 1998, six new North-South Implementation Bodies have now been established. These new bodies operate in the areas of food safety, trade and business development, language, aquaculture and marine, special EU programmes and inland waterways. The British-Irish Agreement Act, 1999, establishes these bodies in this jurisdiction and brings them within the remit of my Office. Both Ombudsman Offices, North and South, have jurisdiction over the Implementation Bodies and the Act provides for liaison and co-operation between both Offices, in dealing with complaints against these bodies. The jurisdiction of my Office covers "actions taken in the State by or on behalf of" the bodies and a parallel provision applies in the case of the Northern Ireland Ombudsman.

Ombudsman (Amendment) Bill

For the seventh year in succession I find it necessary to record in my Annual Report that the Ombudsman (Amendment) Bill has yet to be enacted. In 1999 the Government approved the heads of a Bill which would extend my remit to bodies in the wider public sector such as the public voluntary hospitals, FÁS and the Health and Safety Authority. Despite the Government's decision the draft legislation - which is quite simple and straightforward - has yet to be prepared and put before the Oireachtas.

I note that in relation to the Freedom of Information Act, 1997 it has been possible, several times, to increase the number of public bodies which are subject to my jurisdiction as Information Commissioner. In addition, and as mentioned above, the British-Irish Agreement Act, 1999 has brought North-South Implementation Bodies within my jurisdiction as Ombudsman. These developments render even more inexplicable the failure to enact the Ombudsman (Amendment) Bill.

Strategic Management and Business Planning

The task of delivering public services has become increasingly complex and challenging. Public bodies need to constantly review their internal processes and procedures to ensure that public services are delivered effectively, efficiently and professionally. This also applies to the three areas of activity in which I and the staff of my Office are involved viz. the Office of the Ombudsman, the Office of the Information Commissioner and the secretariat to the Public Offices Commission. While each body exercises three separate independent statutory functions, they have the common aim, as expressed in our mission statement, of "helping to achieve a public service which is open, fair and accountable."

In June 2000 I launched the first business plan to cover the three statutory functions. The plan has two aspects. First, it outlines the mission statement, values and the key strategic priorities for the three offices as a whole. Second, it contains detailed business plans for each of the line functions within the total organisation.

The task of formulating the plan was a great challenge in itself. The plan focuses on practical and achievable objectives and puts a lot of emphasis on the implementation of the various elements within specified deadlines. Work on its implementation is now well advanced and I am confident it will further enhance our high standards of professionalism and the quality of service which we deliver to our clients.

Reports on Specific Issues or Areas of Public Administration

In my 1999 Annual Report I indicated that I would continue the practice of submitting occasional reports to the Oireachtas on specific issues or areas of public administration. These reports usually focus on systemic or procedural deficiencies which have adversely affected large numbers of complainants. The reports have been very effective in securing redress for complainants and, indeed, for others who might not have complained to my Office but who were also adversely affected by the actions of the public body in question. Another positive outcome is the improvements to public administration standards generally when public bodies take steps to correct the procedural defects highlighted in these reports. Most importantly, these reports, together with my annual reports, are presented to the Oireachtas in order to assist and support it in its work.

In July 2000 I published and submitted to the Oireachtas a report on my "own initiative" investigation into the level of unrefunded overpayments on borrowers' local authority housing loan accounts. The investigation arose from my examination of an individual complaint against Meath County Council which had continued to accept payments from an elderly borrower in respect of a housing loan even though it had been fully paid up for almost two years. The case led me to believe that there may have been systemic weaknesses in the processing of such loan repayments in other local authorities. And so, I launched a local authority-wide investigation which I am empowered to carry out without the need for specific complaints. The report highlighted the extent to which many local authorities had continued to accept payments from borrowers on loans that had been paid in full and the failure of many local authorities to take any steps to refund the overpayments made on fully paid up loans. Following my investigation all overpayments were refunded together with compensation for loss of purchasing power of the amounts in question. The local authorities also agreed to introduce new procedures to ensure that this type of complaint would not recur.

I also completed a report of my investigation of complaints regarding the payment of nursing home subventions by health boards. Complaints about the subvention regulations - in particular, the family assessment and "pocket money" provisions - have featured regularly in my Office's annual reports since 1993. My investigation focused on the underlying issues which gave rise to these complaints in the first place. It looked at the role of the Department of Health and Children in making the regulations and in overseeing the introduction and operation of the subvention scheme nationally.

I found that the Department and the health boards had acted in a manner which was "without proper authority", "improperly discriminatory" and generally "contrary to fair or sound administration". Action has since been taken by the Department to remedy the situation, substantial arrears, amounting to £6 million, are being paid and the subvention rates are to be increased from 1 April 2001.

The report also raises serious issues in regard to the relationship, on the one hand, between the Oireachtas and the Executive and, on the other, the relationships within the Executive between the political and administrative levels. These issues include the effective vetting of secondary legislation, the relationship between Ministers and senior civil servants, the funding of entitlements and human rights issues in relation to the elderly. In the report I outline how these issues might be progressed.

Public Access and Awareness

Accessibility to my Office is a key element in the provision of our services to the general public. This is why over the years my staff have visited Citizens Information Centres (CICs) at a range of locations outside Dublin on a monthly basis as well as periodic visits to towns and cities throughout the country. These visits are preceded by intensive local publicity to highlight public awareness. Posters, flyers, press and local radio advertisements are employed in these publicity campaigns. In 2000 my Office arranged the distribution of information leaflets to over 195,000 households.

During 2000 my staff paid monthly visits to CICs in Cork, Limerick, Waterford, Galway, Portlaoise and Coolock. A total of 621 new complaints were received during these CIC visits of which 401 were valid and 220 (or 35%) were invalid. I wish to record my appreciation to the CICs for the continuing support they provide to my staff in the delivery of this service. Staff from my Office also made one-day visits to Letterkenny, Donegal, Sligo, Nenagh, Tipperary and Navan. A total of 326 new complaints were received as a result of these visits, of which 265 were valid and 61 (or 19%) were invalid.

The combined total of new valid complaints received as a result of the monthly and one-day visits amounted to 666. This valuable local service is continuing in 2001 and details are available from my Office's website at www.irlgov.ie/ombudsman/ on the Internet.

Contact with other Ombudsman Offices

During the year I was delighted to receive visits from Mrs Nuala O'Loan, the newly appointed Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, Mr Antonius Sujata, of the Ombudsman Commission for Indonesia, the Russian Commissioner for Human Rights Mr Oleg Orestovich Mironov and Mr Tom Frawley, the newly appointed Assembly Ombudsman for Northern Ireland. In addition my Office arranged an intensive two-day course on Investigative Interviewing Skills in which staff from the Northern Ireland Ombudsman's Office also participated.

Relations with Bodies Within Remit

I am very grateful for the high level of co-operation which I receive from the vast majority of public bodies within my jurisdiction. I acknowledge the very important role played by many liaison officers who, in the midst of the busy schedules of their own public bodies, ensure that the priorities of my Office are addressed in a timely and comprehensive manner.

One of the ways in which I assess the degree of co-operation by public bodies is the number of Section 7 notices which my Office issues in the course of the year. A Section 7 notice is a statutory demand for the provision of information which my Office requires in examining a complaint. It is only issued in circumstances where there has been a lengthy delay on the part of the public body in providing the requested information. It is a mechanism which is used sparingly by my Office. I first began publishing statistics on the number of Section 7 notices issued by my Office in my 1998 Annual Report which recorded a total of 45 notices. In 1999 this was reduced to 27 and as can be seen from the figures given here the total number of notices issued in 2000 was 14. I welcome the reduction in the numbers of notices which it has been necessary to issue which reflects improved response rates to my Office. However, I am concerned that the Department of Education and Science, with three such notices, is at the very top of the list especially as the bulk of complaints about the Department concern delays or failure to reply to correspondence. While the overall number of notices which issued to local authorities has declined, I must also express a particular note of concern about the fact that they accounted for 11, or almost 80%, of the notices which issued in 2000. In fact, local authorities have accounted for the vast bulk of these notices over the past three years. I would like to see some concerted action taken by County Managers to address this disturbing trend.

Although my primary function is to investigate complaints, I also have a role in promoting higher standards of public administration. One of the ways in which I approach the latter role is to encourage public bodies to set up internal complaints systems. My Office now spends a considerable amount of time advising public bodies on the broad principles which underpin effective complaints systems.

Body	No. of Section 7 Notices Issued
Civil Service
Department of Education and Science	3
Local Authorities
Fingal County Council	2
Galway County Council	2
New Ross Urban District Council	1
Roscommon County Council	1
South Dublin County Council	1
Thurles Urban District Council	1
Westport Urban District Council	1
Wexford County Council	2
Total	14

Complaint Statistics

During 2000 I received 5,102 complaints compared to 3,986 in 1999. In addition my Office dealt with 4,441 telephone queries from members of the public, other than telephone queries from complainants. Most of these callers require basic information or advice in relation to a wide variety of public services. Advice provided by my staff can range from how to make a complaint to a public body or where to obtain more comprehensive information about various services. The provision of advice has become a growing area of activity for my Office in recent years. We have committed more resources to it and we are very happy to provide this service to people who contact my Office with nowhere else to turn. I appreciate very much the great pride which my staff display, not only in successfully resolving a complaint, but also in advising a distressed caller on their rights and entitlements and the relevant body to contact for further information. Taking general enquiries and complaints into account my Office was contacted by over 9,500 people in 2000. The comparable figure for 1999 was 8,800.

Of the 5,102 complaints received in 2000 a total of 2,966, approximately 58%, were outside my jurisdiction, leaving a figure of 2,136 valid complaints received. The proportion of invalid complaints continues to increase annually. At one level these growing numbers indicate that citizens are becoming increasingly aware of their rights and have a greater propensity to complain when things go wrong. While this is a welcome development it also demonstrates the need by government and others to ensure that adequate complaint mechanisms are put in place to cope with this demand. As I said earlier in this chapter, my own Office's jurisdiction is excessively narrow in that, for no good reason, large areas of the public service are excluded from investigation. Citizens who complain unsuccessfully against these public bodies are left, in effect, with nowhere to turn. I am asking that this situation be remedied without further delay.

Other patterns are emerging in the statistics which I believe are mainly a reflection of current social and economic trends. Complaints against the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs continue the recent pattern of decline, reflecting the decreasing numbers obtaining benefits from the Department. For example, statistics released by the Department indicated that the numbers on the Live Register for November 2000 were at their lowest level since November 1981. In 2000 there were 454 complaints against the Department whereas the totals for 1999, 1998 and 1997 were 665, 786 and 1007 respectively. This represents a decrease of 55% in such complaints since 1997. The Department has made a conscious effort in recent years to provide a more client focused service and has made improvements in areas such as the provision of information to clients on services and decisions. This has also contributed towards the decrease in complaints against the Department.

Again, as a reflection of social and economic trends, complaints against local authorities continue to rise and amounted to 787 in 2000 which was 37% of all complaints received. Planning and housing complaints amounted to 487 in total which is 62% of all local authority complaints received. As will be seen from my remarks in Chapter 2 local authority complaints, and in particular planning complaints, are complex and time consuming and the processing of these complaints is very resource-intensive.

Complaints against health boards decreased from 387 in 1999 to 304 in 2000. Decisions by health boards in relation to Social Welfare Allowances are now appealable to the Social Welfare Appeals Office of the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs and I have no doubt that this has led to the decrease in such complaints reaching my Office.

Back to contents