Plans to transfer Police Complaints to Scottish Public Services Ombudsman is a wrong decision says Police Complaints Commissioner

Plans to transfer complaints about the Police to the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman are “the wrong decision, taken at the wrong time, for the wrong reasons”, says the current Police Complaints Commissioner, Professor John McNeill in a Press Release issued today.

Police Complaints Commissioner blasts transfer plan

“the wrong decision, taken at the wrong time, for the wrong reasons”

The man in charge of looking into complaints about the police in Scotland has attacked plans to transfer his role to the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO) calling them “regressive” and potentially “damaging to public confidence in the police”.

Speaking following the publication of his response to the consultation, Professor John McNeill said: “The police enjoy very significant powers to intervene in our lives, the public’s consent and trust in them hinges on the robustness of the oversight applied to their actions. Any perceived scaling back of that oversight would be a regressive step that could erode trust and undermine public confidence in the police.

“Doing away with a dedicated police complaints oversight body and moving its functions to a general complaints oversight body will go against the powerful trend in police oversight elsewhere in Europe and many other progressive jurisdictions.”

This is a view echoed by Professor Maurice Punch, Visiting Professor at the London School of Economics, who said: “Policing is about some of the most fundamental principles of how the state treats its citizens. What society needs and everyone wants is policing that is accountable and based on integrity. One of the essential pillars in ensuring that, is external accountability through a specialised oversight agency geared to the unique nature of policing.”

Professor McNeill goes on to condemn the timing of the current proposal, saying that even a decision in principle by the Cabinet Secretary for Justice to proceed would be wrong, ahead of the planned consultation on fire and police reform which is due to start in February

Professor McNeill again: “Any consultation on the number of police forces in Scotland has to consider the issue of accountability and governance. It seems obvious to me that any move to reduce the number of forces increases, rather than reduces, the need for a transparency through a dedicated, independent oversight body.

“The poor timing of this proposal raises the very real possibility that we could find ourselves dismantling an organisation that everyone, including the Cabinet Secretary, admits is doing a good job and then having to create an identical one at some point in the future to address the issue of public confidence in the system for overseeing police complaints.”

The Commissioner also questions whether any transfer would result in the simplification of the police complaints process, an argument originally put forward in the Sinclair Report of 2008 and repeated by the Cabinet Secretary in a letter to the Commissioner last month. This is simply not the case, argues McNeill, who says that the SPSO’s jurisdiction over his office is limited to alleged “maladministration” (by him or his staff) and does not extend to questioning the merits of his decisions in his complaint reviews.

“It appears that both Sinclair and the Government believe that if someone is dissatisfied by my findings that they can then ask for a review by the SPSO and by subsuming my role into the SPSO, they simplify the complaints landscape. However, in the absence of maladministration the SPSO has no locus and the only option for someone who does not accept my findings is judicial review.” he said.

The Cabinet Secretary has been unable to provide the Commissioner with any information on the anticipated costs or any savings that will result from the move, saying only that these matters will be “considered in light of the views expressed during the consultation process”. The Commissioner challenges this in his response arguing that this issue ought to have been considered by Scottish Ministers before proposing the transfer.

He said: “As matters stand, the cost of any transfer and in particular whether it is likely to place a greater or lesser burden on the tax payer remains wholly unclear.”

What is clear however is that, even if a decision to transfer the functions of the Commissioner is announced soon, there is unlikely to be sufficient Parliamentary time available to discuss fully the financial and practical implications before the next election. Already one MSP, Richard Baker the Labour Justice spokesman, has raised the issue of the future of the PCCS in the Scottish Parliament and others are expected to follow.

Scottish Parliament to approve Police Complaints Commissioner Jim Martin as new SPSO

The Scottish Parliament has been asked to approve Jim Martin, who is the current Police Complaints Commissioner, for nomination as the new Scottish Public Services Ombudsman.

Mr Martin, who has held a number of posts including General Secretary of the EIS teaching Union and a member of the Scottish Funding Council. The salary for the full time SPSO position is £83,000 p.a.

Parliament to approve nomination of new Public Ombudsman

25 March 2009

The Scottish Parliament will be asked to approve the nomination of Jim Martin as the new Scottish Public Services Ombudsman.

Mr Martin’s nomination, to be agreed by Parliament on Wednesday 25 March, follows an open recruitment process to find a successor to Professor Alice Brown, who is stepping down from the role.

The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman is responsible for investigating complaints against public sector organisations in Scotland including local councils, the National Health Service, housing associations, the Scottish Government and higher and further education establishments.

The Ombudsman investigates complaints where a member of the public claims to have suffered injustice or hardship as a result of maladministration or service failure on behalf of the public authority. He or she also has a role to play in improving public services in Scotland and promoting good complaints handling.

The Parliament will be invited to agree Mr Martin’s nomination before the recommendation goes to Her Majesty the Queen for formal appointment. The appointment process reflects the independence of the Ombudsman's post from both the Parliament and Scottish Government.

Biographical information :

Jim Martin is currently the Police Complaints Commissioner for Scotland, which was set up and established in 2007.

Mr Martin is also the Scottish non-executive chairman of Logica CMG and runs a management consultancy.

He was General Secretary for the Educational Institute of Scotland from 1987 until 1995 and serves as a member of the Scottish Funding Council.

Mr Martin will cease his current positions on taking on the full-time role of Ombudsman. The starting salary for the position is £83,000.

Visit www.spso.org.uk for more information on the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman.

Scottish Public Services Ombudsman rebuked for failure to follow procedures in appointments

The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman, Professor Alice Brown, has been censured by the Scottish Parliament for appointing two deputies without Parliamentary approval ...

The Scotsman reports :

Ombudsman has knuckles rapped over appointments of her deputies

PETER MACMAHON

PROFESSOR Alice Brown, the public services ombudsman, has been censured by MSPs for appointing two deputies at salaries of up to £70,000 a year without Holyrood's approval.

Members of the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body (SPCB) have taken the unprecedented step of rebuking the ombudsman for not following procedures laid down in law for appointments in her organisation.

The row between the SPCB - the organisation responsible for the budgets of Scotland's commissioners and the ombudsman - and Brown arose over her plan to replace three deputy ombudsmen with new posts.

The move from having the ombudsman and three deputies, all formally appointed by the Crown, to the two positions that did not have the same status, was approved by Holyrood when Brown was reappointed for a second five-year term last year.

However, Brown pressed ahead with appointing a director of policy and development and director of investigations without coming back to the SPCB to agree the terms and conditions, including a salary range of between £56,736 to £70, 703.

According to the minutes of the SPCB, the matter came to a head in September when the body was asked formally to endorse the appointments.

Although some members of the SPCB were reluctant to agree the appointments, they were eventually endorsed, but not before the MSPs rebuked the ombudsman over her handling of the issue.

The minutes say that the SPCB expressed "concern at the process which had resulted in the terms and conditions being advertised before consultation with the SPCB, and at the level of starting salary which had been proposed".

They add: "The SPCB considered the process bad practice, particularly given the nature of the office and determined that the ombudsman be advised accordingly."

MSPs on the body also called on Brown to reconsider the proposed level of starting salaries within the agreed range.

A spokesman for the Scottish Parliament says the restructuring of the ombudsman's office had been approved by parliament.

He says the parliament wants a "smooth transition" to the new structure of full time salaried staff in place of Crown appointees, and adds: "Under the legislation, the ombudsman is required to have any new terms and conditions approved by the SPCB. In this instance, this related to two new full time director posts and their salary scales.

"The SPCB was aware of the posts involved, however, it was not informed of the proposed salary levels until after these posts had been advertised and successful candidates identified.

"The approval of the SPCB should have been sought prior to these events."

A spokesman for the ombudsman says: "The proposal to introduce two new posts was discussed in advance with officials of the SPCB and no concerns were expressed about what was proposed.

"Subsequent to the SPCB's meeting on 12 September, there have been ongoing discussions with the SPCB to continue to develop clear and efficient shared processes."

The spokesman says that, after further discussion with the SPCB, Holyrood accepted the pay scales.

The job of director of investigations went to Eric Drake, formerly one of the deputy ombudsmen. David Robb, a former official at the Scottish Government, was appointed director of policy and development.

Scottish Public Services Ombudsman refuses to rule on personal care

Not much use an Ombudsman who refuses to look into complaints .. but one way to do it is to lay the blame at Parliament & the politicians ... who is right and who is wrong ? and who should have been asking for wider powers all along ?

The Herald reports :

Impossible to rule on personal care, says ombudsman

DOUGLAS FRASER, Scottish Political Editor

The Public Services Ombudsman warned yesterday she has had to suspend investigations into "unremedied injustice" facing patients who have problems with NHS provision of Continuing Care.

Professor Alice Brown said she cannot rule on them because the Scottish Government's guidelines are so out of date, linking the problem to her repeated warnings to ministers that they have to sort out the confusing law on Free Personal Care.

In her monthly briefing on cases the public bring to her with complaints about public services, the Ombudsman said yesterday that she has formally suspended investigations into complaints on NHS Continuing Care until ministers address the weaknesses in the system.

Continuing Care is the provision for those assessed as having medical needs, often with chronic conditions, which is provided by the NHS in a care home or their own homes, often after being discharged from hospital. The guidelines were published in 1996.

The Ombudsman said no single health board could address the issue until it is tackled nationally.

Previous warnings to the Scottish Executive before the election had led to a promise that there will be a report in January.

Next week, there is to be a meeting in Perth hosted by the executive to discuss the problems involved.

"The concern and belief that unremedied injustice exists is raised in a number of complaints about Continuing Care brought to this office," said Professor Brown.

"This continues to cause distress and anxiety for vulnerable individuals and their families and to take up considerable amounts of NHS time and resources in addressing these.

"This office will, in turn, continue to receive complaints which it is unable to determine."

Her suspension of investigations follows her ruling from a woman whose mother suffers from Alzheimer's, claiming she had been wrongly charged for care in her nursing home.

The Ombudsman did not rule in favour of the woman, because she found the health board cannot be held responsible for a lack of provision in the legislation for a clear, accessible and transparent assessment system.

She has linked it to her concerns about the lack of clarity in the legislation on Free Personal Care, funded through local authorities, after a Court of Session judge ruled last week that the law did not secure provision for more than 9000 care home residents who fund their own places.

This is to be debated at Holyrood this morning, with Conservatives using their parliamentary time to pressure SNP ministers over their decision to turn down Lord Macphail's request to explain their policy in his court, during a legal battle between the Ombudsman and Argyll and Bute Council.

Speaking in advance of the debate on free personal care, David Manion, chief executive of Age Concern said yesterday: "What the judge made clear was that the words of politicians are not what counts in law.

"The law determined by parliament is what counts and until the legislation is amended, the confusion will continue."

Scottish Public Services Ombudsman condemned as 'unfit for purpose'

The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman comes in for heavy criticism of it's failure to deal properly with complaints and give people a fair hearing against poor public services.

The Herald reports (with some interesting comments on the Herald website) :

Road to the Western Isles is lined with mountains of complaints

DAMIEN HENDERSON

Residents of the Western Isles made more official complaints about public services per head of population than anywhere else in Scotland last year.

The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman revealed there were nearly twice the level of complaints per capita in the Outer Hebrides than the Scottish average. By contrast, people living in and around Aberdeen were least likely to complain.

In a measure of complaints using Scottish postcodes, the Western Isles produced six complaints per 10,000 people while Aberdeen produced 2.4 compared to a Scotland-wide total of 3.4. Edinburgh also weighed in above average, with 4.1 complaints per 10,000.

But despite a huge upsurge in the level of inquiries and complaints received by the ombudsman, most were found to be spurious, with only 2% of complaints fully upheld last year.

A further 6% were partly upheld, but the vast majority failed - in many cases, because complainants had not first exhausted the complaints procedure with the public body they were complaining about.

Out of those cases which went on to be fully investigated and reported to parliament, the proportion fully upheld was 13% and a further 33% were upheld in part.

The figures were disclosed in the annual report of Professor Alice Brown, the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman, who investigates complaints about local government, health, housing the Scottish Government, quangos, and higher and further education.

Her staff handled more than 4200 inquiries and complaints last year, a 21% rise in inquiries but only a 7% rise in complaints.

Of the 1826 complaints which were closed during the year - some of which had been lodged the previous year - 41% were classed as "premature", 20% were deemed out of jurisdiction, 12% were discontinued before they could be investigated, 9% were either withdrawn or failed to provide enough information, 9% were not upheld, 6% were partially upheld, 2% were fully upheld and 1% were discontinued while they were being investigated.

Out of that total, some 315 complaints, or 17%, resulted in investigation reports being sent to parliament.

Weblinks
Scottish Public Services Ombudsman

Scottish Public Services Ombudsman Watch