Reports that Peter Tyndall, Ombudsman for Public Services in Wales, is seeking new powers to prevent publication of some of his reports and prosecute anyone who discloses their content to the media have attracted almost universal criticism.
Plaid Wrexham has explained how the Ombudsman and the public authorities he investigates are already protected from the public gaze. Sometimes the only way in which abuses and maladministration by public bodies become public knowledge is if the complainant goes to the press.
While the Ombudsman, local authorities and other public bodies usually agree on steps to be taken to remedy abuses and changes to procedures to prevent the recurrence of such abuses, it is sometimes the case that the offending authorities are extremely reluctant to own up to any wrong-doing. Carmarthenshire County Council's begrudging and very half-hearted acceptance of criticism is a case in point.
But if there is one thing which bodies such as Carmarthenshire hate more than criticism by the Ombudsman, it is public reporting of what has happened. Naming and shaming and coverage of scandals in the media is the most powerful way of holding our PR obsessed institutions to account.
Despite the limitations on his powers and the secrecy which is built into the system, public confidence in Peter Tyndall and his office remains high. For the victims of abuse and maladministration he is a friend and the only hope they have of getting redress. It is a great pity that he feels the need to retreat behind the same walls of secrecy as so many other public bodies.
Whether Peter Tyndall will get his way remains to be seen, but in the meantime his office has taken steps to remove the majority of his reports from public view. The Ombudsman's website was very recently rejigged, and now only gives access to reports from the last two years.
Delyth Jenkins recently wrote to the Ombudsman asking him to restore the archives.
Update
Delyth writes: I received a response to my letter dated the 22nd May 2013, on Friday
7th June 2013, from an Ombudsman's representative. She stated that and I
quote, "It has been the practice to hold the full text of public
Interest reports on the website for a period of two years. The rationale
for the two year timeline is that legislation, statutory guidance and
policies and procedures of public bodies change over time. Holding the
full text of reports on the website for long periods therefore risks
misleading people when they are reading about circumstances and
information, which are possibly no longer current or relevant". She
goes on to say that the summaries of investigations are contained in the
Ombudsman's casebook and their Annual reports, and that the summary of
my complaint, ref no 200600720, can be found in their Annual Report
2009/10.
What hasn't changed is the fact that Officers of the
Council, who were so severely criticised within that report, have not
been held to account because they were given anonymity by the Ombudsman.
I
believe that all reports upheld by the Ombudsman, should be public
Interest reports, and all Officers who have failed should be named and
shamed. That is the ONLY WAY the service will improve.
I have
serious concerns that if these additional powers are granted to the
Ombudsman, to keep certain reports secret, then reports such as mine
will not reach the public domain and will not be acted upon. I was
forced to go to the press with my complaint because there had been no
accountability, and I still have serious concerns that Officers who were
so severely criticised by the Ombudsman, are still managing the care of
the most vulnerable people in society. It is now nearly 4 years since
the publication of this damning report. Not enough is being done to
protect the vulnerable.
8 comments:
I received a response to my letter dated the 22nd May 2013, on Friday 7th June 2013,from an Ombudsman's representative. She stated that and I quote, "It has been the practice to hold the full text of public Interest reports on the website for a period of two years. The rationale for the two year timeline is that legislation, statutory guidance and policies and procedures of public bodies change over time. Holding the full text of reports on the wesite for long periods therefore risks misleading people when they are reading about circumstances and information, which are possibly no longer current or relevant". She goes on to say that the summaries of investigations are contained in the Ombudsman's casebook and their Annual repots, and that the summary of my complaint, ref no 200600720, can be found in their Annual Report 2009/10.
What hasn't changed is the fact that Officers of the Council, who were so severely criticised within that report, have not been held to account because they were given anonimity by the Ombudsman.
I believe that all reports upheld by the Ombudsman, should be public Interest reports, and all Officers who have failed should be named and shamed. That is the ONLY WAY
the service will improve. I have serious concerns that if these additional powers are granted to the Ombudsman, to keep certain reports secret, then reports such as mine will not reach the public domain and will not be acted upon. I was forced to go to the press with my complaint because there had been no accountability, and I still have serious concerns that Officers who were so severely criticised by the Ombudsman, are still managing the care of the most vulnerable people in society. It is now nearly 4 years since the publication of this damning report. Not enough is being done to protect the vulnerable.
I would like to draw attention to 3 points within the Ombudsman's report.
Firstly, (point 363) on page 103 which is a part of the Ombudsman's recommendations to Carmarthenshire County Council. It states, and I quote," I recommend that the Authority ensure that all necessary action has now been taken in respect of the abuse of Sally and in respect of the management failures that allowed the abuse to continue and if there are any outstanding issues, that they be dealt with properly and without further delay.
Secondly, page 81 (point 269) and again I quote, "The failure of Officer B and Officer F to take effective action against Officer C when on the 20th June 2005, Officer C had slapped Ms West, indicates that the incident was not seen as important. The culture in which such incidents were tolerated exposed all the service users and the staff to risk". Officer C went on to hit the same service user in an almost identical way 13 months later.
She admitted the assault on the service user and was cautioned by Police. The assault on me by Officer C was never investigated, even though a witness statement from a colleague was provided at the time. Had the assault on me been investigated, the assault on the service user could have been avoided.
Thirdly, (point 366) page 105
"Carmarthenshire County Council has seen a draft of this report and has agreed to implement the recommendations listed at paragraphs 360 to 365.
I will let the public come to the conclusion of what they think should have happened here.
Yes shine a light into the nasty grubby little corners, expose the lot and bring the shameful foreward to suffer shame. Check out the dirt re Hafan Cymru and the unpleaseant goings-on there - defended as "confidential" by those in charge. Publicly funded should be publicly examined. Re aforesaid, I have history there, so can affirm that all is certainly not as glossy and great as the public facade would suggest.
Yeh we need total transparency not secrecy.
Whose job should it have been to deal with these failed managers?
Latest update
The Ombudsman's request for additional powers to keep some reports secret and to be able to prosecute if details are then made public, has made the current bi-monthly edition of 'Private eye'.
The information is included in a whistleblowing article by Eileen Chubb, Founder and National Director of the Charity, Compassion in Care. In a Parliamentary petition, Mrs Chubb is calling for various reforms, including making it an offence for employers to cover up and fail to act on public disclosures. The report submitted includes the evidence of some 1500 whistleblowers.
The Report, 'Breaking the Silence'
can now be found on the Compassion in care website - www.compassionincare.com and follow the link to 'Edna's Law.
It seems that the Public Services Ombudsman For Wales is already keeping reports secret. When my report was issued in Sept.2009, it was publicised by Carmarthenshire County Council according to the requirements of the Public Services Ombudsman For Wales Act
(2005). Another section 16, public Interest report was issued at the same time but Carmarthenshire County Council failed to publicise this according to the requirements of the Act
(2005). Also, this report never featured on the Ombudsman's website in any shape or form.
Why would an Independent regulator want to keep this information from the Public? The Public have a right to see this Information. It is even more damning than my report.
Post a Comment