The year in review

Review of Health Services and Extension of Ombudsman’s Remit

I understand that a review of health service agencies and structures, including the health boards, is currently being concluded by the Department of Health and Children. It is expected that elements of the review will deal with the provision of services through the public hospital system. The national health strategy Quality and Fairness - A Health System For You has confirmed the Government’s belief that the Ombudsman is the appropriate mechanism for dealing with complaints relating to the public health services, and also confirms the Government’s intention to extend the Ombudsman’s remit to the public voluntary hospitals and other voluntary agencies in the health area.

I regret to report that, once again, no progress was made in giving practical effect to this issue in 2002. The health strategy also provides for the development of a statutory framework so as to achieve greater clarity and uniformity of approach in dealing with complaints, structured local resolution processes as well as an opportunity for independent review.

The Eastern Regional Health Authority (ERHA) is pressing ahead with the development of a complaint handling process for all of the health agencies in the eastern region, along the lines envisaged by the Department. A vital element of the proposed process is that all complainants would have access to my Office in relation to matters which are not resolved locally or by way of independent review. But until my remit is extended to the wider health area the present unsatisfactory situation will remain in spite of the ERHA’s initiative and possible similar initiatives in other areas.

Public Access and Awareness

My Office strives to make its services as accessible as possible to the general public. During the year my staff visited Citizens Information Centres (CICs) at a range of locations on a monthly basis as well as paying periodic visits to towns and cities throughout the country.

During 2002 my staff paid monthly visits to CICs in Cork, Limerick, Galway and Coolock in Dublin. A total of 363 new complaints were received during these visits of which 235 were valid and 128 (or 35%) were invalid. Over the years the CICs have given invaluable support to my Office in bringing our services to the public.

Staff from my Office also made one and two-day visits to Ballina, Ennis and Sligo. A total of 151 new complaints were received as a result of these visits, of which 130 were valid and 21 (or 14%) were invalid. The combined total of new valid complaints received as a result of the monthly and one-day visits amounted to 365. Details of the 2003 programme of visits are available from my Office’s website at www.ombudsman.ie

Visitors to my Office

During the year I was pleased to welcome a number of distinguished visitors to my Office. In January my Office received a delegation of public servants from Singapore who are engaged in public service modernisation. Singapore does not have an Ombudsman or legislation permitting access to official information. They were particularly interested in exploring the impact of these legislative provisions on the Irish public service modernisation programme.

In September I received a delegation from the Egyptian National Council for Women. The Council was established in 2002 and has the overall objective of protecting women from abuse of their human rights and from gender discrimination. As part of its operation it had set up its own Ombudsman Office to deal with complaints and the purpose of the visit was to draw on the experience of my Office in complaint handling.

In October Sir Brian Elwood, Chief Ombudsman of New Zealand paid a visit. Sir Brian became Chief Ombudsman in 1995 and in 1999 he was elected President of the International Ombudsman Institute which is a world-wide organisation of ombudsman offices. During his visit Sir Brian kindly gave a talk to my staff on the work of his Office which combines the role of traditional Ombudsman with that of reviewing decisions to refuse access to information under the Official Information Act. Sir Brian is due to retire in 2003 and I wish him a long and happy retirement.

Also in October I received a visit from Professor Alice Brown, the newly appointed Scottish Public Services Ombudsman who was accompanied by her three deputies. Her office now carries on the work which was previously the responsibility of the Scottish Parliamentary Ombudsman, the Scottish Health Service Ombudsman, the Scottish Local Government Ombudsman and the Housing Association Ombudsman for Scotland. As a newly established Office they were particularly interested in learning about my Office’s IT systems and the methods we use to bring our services to people in remote areas by means of local and regional visits.

Business Planning

Business planning activities in 2002 concentrated on three key areas, viz. the quality of the service we provide to our clients, our relationship with the public bodies within remit and the training and development of our staff.

Service to Our Clients

Case Screening

New case screening procedures were introduced in 2001 which facilitate early identification of complex complaints and complaints which are outside jurisdiction. The procedures help in matching resources to complaints and, indeed, in ensuring that resources are not needlessly expended on cases which have no merit or which, after some examination, turn out not to be within jurisdiction. A review of the new procedures was carried out in 2002 and a series of refinements have been identified which will be implemented in 2003.

These will lead to greater efficiency in the service we provide to complainants.

Quality Casework

Quality standards and indicators have been developed which will measure the quality of input by my staff to individual cases. Among the issues to be monitored are timescales for acknowledging complaints and reporting on progress to complainants, whether the case was properly screened, whether all relevant points in the complaint were satisfactorily addressed, whether correspondence with the complainant was in clear and simple language and, in the event that the decision was appealed, whether it led to a reworking of the case. Throughout 2003 a number of Office working groups will sample individual complaint files by reference to these quality standards and indicators and will report their findings to the Management Committee at bimonthly intervals.

Of its nature quality is more difficult to measure than quantity. But the work done in developing and monitoring the quality of casework will help to ensure that in the drive towards greater efficiency, there are measures in place which put value on the quality of the case examination process and, ultimately, protect the interests of our complainants.

Client Service Strategy

Having regard to its statutory functions, and the initiatives outlined in the preceding paragraphs it will be clear that the Office, of necessity, is particularly sensitive to its clients’ needs. However, in order to highlight the importance of quality customer service and the linkages with business planning and the Performance Management Development System (PMDS), work commenced in 2002 on the development of a client service strategy. Among other things, the strategy will address the principles of quality customer service including a formalised internal appeals system for complainants who are dissatisfied with the decisions in their cases.

Case Numbers

The fourth main area of activity under this heading was a concerted effort throughout the year to reduce the number of cases on hand. A 37% reduction was achieved, from 1514 cases on hand at the end of 2001 to 960 cases on hand at the end of 2002. As a result, more complainants are having their cases processed by the Office within a shorter timescale.

Relations with Public Bodies within Remit

In my Annual Report, 2001 I outlined a framework which had been agreed between myself and representatives of the County and City Managers’ Association on which to build better working relations with my Office. I am happy to report good progress in this regard and that the framework, which is to some extent developmental, has been well received and is paying dividends from my perspective. The objective is to improve working relations between my Office and local authorities by developing a better understanding of our respective roles and, where possible, to accommodate the concerns of local authorities.

During the year staff from my Office met with eight County Managers and held seminars for local authority staff at three locations; Galway, Dundalk and Wicklow. The host authority at each location invited local authority staff from within their region to attend so that a number of local authorities were represented at the regional seminars. The basic theme of the seminars was; What local authorities can do to improve service to the Ombudsman and how the Ombudsman can help local authorities.

Arising from feedback from the first seminar my Office issued a special booklet to all local authorities on how to deal with complaints taken up by my Office. One local authority enquired whether my Office would process complaints by way of email rather than by correspondence and this was agreed to as it will be more efficient for both organisations. I would like to record my appreciation to the County Managers who organised the seminars and for the manner in which my staff were received. We will continue to look at ways of developing seminars in 2003, possibly to include workshops on selected themes. Other local authorities have also expressed interest in holding seminars and in this regard we expect to be kept very busy this year and beyond.

My Office continued to engage with health boards, particularly on setting up internal complaints procedures and I am pleased to note that this matter is gaining increasing attention and priority within health boards. Five years ago I published a Guide to Internal Complaints Systems "Settling Complaints" and my Office is always willing to provide whatever help we can to those bodies within jurisdiction that do not as yet have an internal complaints system. The reason I encourage internal complaint systems is twofold; it improves the quality of decision making in the body concerned and it should reduce the number of complaints to my Office.

A further positive development during the year was the establishment, in May 2002, of the Agriculture Appeals Office. This was set up under the Agriculture Appeals Act, 2001 and is designed as an appeals mechanism for farmers who are dissatisfied with decisions of the Department in relation to their entitlements under any of the FEOGA schemes. As I mentioned in last year’s Annual Report, the Act specifically provides that the Office comes within my remit and I can therefore examine complaints where the appellant is dissatisfied with the outcome. I very much welcome the establishment of the Office and I look forward to working with it to assist in the improvement of the administration of schemes by the Department.

Our Staff

Performance Management and Development (PMDS)

In 2001, we launched the PMDS, we trained all staff in its operation and went live with the system in 2002. Every staff member now has a role profile, a statement of key deliverables and corresponding performance indicators and a training and development plan. At the time of writing, every staff member’s performance for the year 2002 is being reviewed by his or her manager and, where appropriate, changes to individual training and development plans are being agreed. These training and development plans are facilitating the Office in developing generic training and have led to a considerable increase in the number of training days delivered in 2002. Most importantly, training is now more job-focused and is helping to meet organisational needs as well as individual staff members’ needs.

One of the key benefits arising from the introduction of PMDS has been to bring home to staff and managers alike the relevance of the Office’s business plans to their own day-to-day work. Organisational goals have been broken down into section level objectives and, in turn, these are formulated as annual targets for individual staff members under PMDS. There have been two important outcomes to this approach. First, managers are becoming more aware of the importance of " the business of managing" and the resources which are available to them in their efforts to meet their objectives. Second, staff are becoming more aware of the importance of their individual contributions and the training and development supports which are necessary to help them to realise optimum performance.

Developing a Human Resource Management (HRM) Strategy

In 2002, with some assistance from an outside facilitator, the Management Team developed a draft HRM Strategy for the Office. Some of the elements of the strategy were first identified when formulating the Office’s Business Plan 2000-2001. However, it was decided at that time to prioritise just two key HRM issues viz. management development training for the Senior Management Team and implementation of PMDS. The objectives in the Business Plan in relation to these two issues have been met in full.

Having now reviewed the entire HRM agenda we see the essence of a HRM strategy as a sustained focus on the people who do the work of an organisation. A HRM strategy is essential for maintaining quality customer care, attracting and retaining high quality staff and ensuring ongoing commitment from staff to continuously improving the organisation. It entails the development of strategies to attract the right people to the organisation with appropriate skills and competencies and strategies to retain them, once recruited. These represent new challenges for the civil service and, in turn, our organisation as it now has to compete as never before with other attractive employment opportunities for school leavers, graduates and others seeking to re-enter the work force in mid-career.

PMDS has created a new awareness of the importance of our human resources in meeting individual targets, section objectives and organisational goals. In the past there was a tendency to formulate strategic and business plans without devoting too much attention to what was needed to facilitate staff in the task of implementing these plans. The purpose of a HRM strategy is to address these staff needs as well as the organisational needs mentioned above.

The Office’s Partnership Committee has already contributed to the development of the HRM Strategy and there will be wider consultation with staff generally. The Committee will also have a role in implementing specific aspects of the strategy.

Review of Partnership Process

With the assistance of an outside facilitator, the Office’s partnership process was reviewed. As a result of the review, the Partnership Committee and its various working groups are now more actively involved in the Office’s change management agenda. The Committee is also developing a range of initiatives to raise the staff’s awareness of its activities.

Notices issued under Section 7 of the Ombudsman Act, 1980

In line with a policy I introduced in 1998, I am publishing the statistics on the number of Section 7 notices issued by my Office during 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 normally only issued as a last resort when there has been an unacceptable delay on the part of the public body in providing the requested information. My 1998 Annual Report listed a total of 45 notices. In 1999 this was reduced to 27 and this was further reduced to 14 in 2000. I was disappointed to record an increase to 19 in 2001. The total for 2002 amounts to 16 which breaks down as follows:

While I am glad to record a reduction in the number of Section 7 notices issued compared to last year an unwelcome feature of the figures is that the Department of Education & Science once again tops the list for the third year in a row. Half the total of notices issued were sent to local authorities. I would urge the public bodies with poor records in responding to my Office to seek to come to grips with this pattern by setting organisational goals aimed at improving response times to my Office as part of their business planning targets.

Redress for Taxpayers

During 2002 I submitted a special report "Redress for Taxpayers" to both Houses of the Oireachtas. Following an investigation which I carried out into a number of complaints against the Revenue Commissioners, the Revenue refused to implement three of my five recommendations. This was an unprecedented event in the history of the Office of the Ombudsman and for this reason I considered it necessary to present a special report to each of the Houses of the Oireachtas under Sections 6(5) and 6(7) of the Ombudsman Act, 1980. The background to the investigation is set out below.

The investigation concerned the actions of the Revenue Commissioners in respect of two issues:

(i) time limits on retrospective refunds of tax wrongly collected and

(ii) compensation for loss of value where tax refunds are made in cases where the overpayments of tax were the result of maladministration.

The first issue involved two widows both of whom are in receipt of public service occupational widows’ pensions. Following a 1988 High Court decision, Ó Coindealbháin (Inspector of Taxes) v Breda O’Carroll [1988] ITR 221, which held that the children’s portion of a Garda Síochána widow’s pension should not be taxed as the income of the surviving parent, both women claimed refunds of the tax incorrectly deducted from them. The decision of the High Court had wide-ranging implications as it applied not only to Garda widows but also to widows of civil servants, local authority officials and teachers. In the case of all those affected by O’Carroll, Revenue refused to allow a full refund of the tax and limited the refund to what it claimed was a statutory limit of five years. The two widows complained to me that they had been wrongly denied full refunds of tax. Both complainants also claimed compensation for loss of value for the refunds denied them and for the amounts actually refunded to them. In addition, six other complainants complained that a tax refund properly owing to them had been wrongly retained by Revenue for lengthy periods. Revenue had refused to pay them interest or compensation for loss of value on the grounds that there was no specific statutory provision which provided for the payment of such interest in their particular circumstances. As a result of the investigation I made five recommendations:

1. Revenue should undertake to make retrospective payments covering the ten year period prior to the date of the claim made by the two widows in respect of any income tax levied and not already refunded, on the pension payments made to their children during that period;

2. Revenue should put in place as soon as possible arrangements whereby refunds of any income tax levied, and not already refunded, can be made to all individuals who were similarly affected by the O’Carroll judgement;

3. Revenue should make a compensation payment for loss of purchasing power or loss of interest on the refunds of income tax made in the individual cases which are listed in the investigation report and in all cases to which recommendation 2 applied;

4. Revenue should similarly make compensation payments for loss of purchasing power or loss of interest in other cases where a complaint has been made to the Ombudsman and where the examination of the complaint has been held over pending the outcome of this investigation;

5. Revenue should without delay make provision for a general scheme for payment of compensation for loss of purchasing power in respect of tax refunds made to taxpayers of income tax levied and paid. This general scheme should be designed to cover cases where, as a result of an error, misinterpretation, oversight or other similar action on the part of the Revenue Commissioners, the taxpayer has been adversely affected.

The Revenue Commissioners accepted recommendation 1 in full and recommendation 2 subject to certain reservations. They said that they could not implement the remaining recommendations involving compensatory payments claiming that they did not have the statutory authority to do so.

With regard to recommendation 5, the Minister for Finance made provision for a new general entitlement to interest on overpaid taxes in the Finance Bill 2003. This provision will, when implemented, apply from six months after the date on which the claim is made by the taxpayer. However, where Revenue misconstrues the law, interest will be paid from the date the excess tax was paid, subject to the overall time limit on repayments of four years. The provision met the requirements of recommendation 5 and I was pleased with this development.

After I submitted my special report to both Houses of the Oireachtas on the investigation I was invited, as was the Chairman of the Revenue Commissioners, by the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance and the Public Service to brief members on the circumstances of the investigation and my recommendations. Following this briefing, the Minister for Finance made a further amendment to the Finance Bill 2003 which fully met the requirements of recommendation 3. In addition, the Minister also announced that compensation payments would be made on an ex gratia basis to the taxpayers affected by recommendation 4. I warmly welcomed this development and I very much appreciate the Minister’s decision, in co-operation with the Revenue Commissioners to pay compensation to the taxpayers involved. I believe that the Minister has affirmed the proud record of the Office of the Ombudsman in having the authority of its recommendations recognised. I also wrote to the Chairman of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance and the Public Service to thank him and the members of the committee for the energy and attention which they had devoted to my special report. I stated that the time which the committee gave to my report was crucial in securing justice for the people involved and it also demonstrated the power of effective parliamentary scrutiny.

The full text of my investigation report is on my Office website at www.ombudsman.ie

Publication of Case Digest

During the year I compiled a Digest of Cases which outlined details of twenty significant cases completed by my Office in 2000-2001. It was published early in 2003. My Annual Reports provide a snapshot of the work of my Office over a particular twelve month period. Due to space constraints it is not always possible to give details of all cases of interest during a particular year and so the digest is meant to complement my Annual Reports. It also highlights the developmental role of my Office over the years and illustrates how my staff tackle cases and achieve solutions to complaints. It includes an outline of the various powers available to my Office and how these powers are used to resolve complaints. I hope the digest helps to raise public awareness of my Office and illustrates to the public generally that there is a very effective free service at their disposal to assist them when things go wrong in their dealings with public bodies. The digest is available from the Government Publications Office or can be downloaded from the Office website. Similar digests will be published on an occasional basis in the future.