Date released: 8 June 2011
- Complaints made to her Office in 2010 rise to 3,727 - up 30% on 2009, the highest number recorded in over 10 years.
- 1,317 complaints made in 2010 were outside her jurisdiction – up 22% when compared with 2009.
- 9,390 enquiries made to her Office.
Reform of Government - the role of the Office of the Ombudsman
On 2 February last I sent a paper to all political parties and Oireachtas members entitled "Developing and Optimising the Role of the Ombudsman". This explained how I believed that the Ombudsman could play a fuller role in supporting the checks and balances required for good Government. I detailed four specific proposals, which I felt would allow my Office to maximise its contribution to Government reform and rebalance the relationship between the Ombudsman and the Government so as to further increase public confidence in the effective working of the Institution of the Ombudsman.
Among the proposals were:
- Constitutional status for the Office of the Ombudsman,
- An improved reporting relationship with the Oireachtas,
- Extension of the Ombudsman remit to include the prisons and all issues relating to immigration, refugees, asylum seekers and naturalisation
The Ombudsman continued,
“Most of the changes I have put forward for consideration will need new legislation, and little or no additional expenditure. In fact the changes proposed are likely to result in savings in other areas. The Government Programme for National Recovery, published in March last, took into account some of my suggestions in my document.”
Speaking about the reforms, Ombudsman O´Reilly said,
“I strongly welcome the commitment of the Government to extend the remit of the Ombudsman to all publicly funded bodies. Also, the establishment of a new Oireachtas Committee - the Investigations, Oversight and Petitions Committee. This will provide a much needed formal channel of consultation and collaboration between the Oireachtas and the Ombudsman. It will be responsible for receiving and debating my Annual and Special Reports and for ensuring that my criticisms and recommendations, as Ombudsman, are acted upon. I have already made some suggestions to the Department of Finance relating to the practicalities of implementing the proposals to broaden my Office’s remit. I am hopeful that early progress can be made in delivering on these commitments which I see as an essential component of the public service reform programme”.
The Ombudsman added that she hoped to have ongoing constructive engagement with the Government and the relevant Ministers and their officials in relation to the Programme for Government as it affects her Office and, indeed, on her wider proposals for developing the Ombudsman role.
Commenting recently on her proposal for constitutional status for the Office of the Ombudsman, Ms. O’Reilly said,
“The Office of the Ombudsman should have constitutional status if it is to be safe from political attack and partisanship. Constitutional status would enhance the authority of the Office and ensure that it was treated appropriately when conflicts with government arose. It would also further recognise the Office as a viable alternative to the courts, in securing access to justice, and in an informal and cost-free manner.”
Complaints against public bodies - the numbers:
- Civil Service at 1,675 - up 39% on 2009, accounting for 45% of all complaints received in 2010
- HSE at 1,088 - up 44% on 2009, accounting for 27% of all complaints received in 2010
- Local Authorities at 979 - up 14% on 2009, accounting for 26.3% of all complaints received in 2010
- An Post at 58 - up 23% on 2009, accounting for 1.5% of all complaints received in 2010
Commenting, the Ombudsman said
“It is evident from the huge upsurge in complaints made to me in 2010, a new record high, that growing numbers of people are experiencing difficulties with our public services, especially with unemployment and benefits. The rise of 53% in complaints received about the Department of Social Protection in 2010 over 2009 - 1,181 as compared with 772 - comes as no surprise, given our economic situation. Clearly, people are engaging more with public bodies but this should not lead to lower standards or people being unfairly treated. Looking at some of the case studies spotlighted in my Report, unquestionably, some people badly need our help and the free service the taxpayer pays for us to provide. The fact that complaint numbers continue to grow, year on year, underlines the demanding task before us to raise standards of public service across the board”.
The Ombudsman also noted the continuing high level of enquiries dealt with by her Office totaling 9,390 in 2010:
“Just because someone contacts my Office with a problem outside of my remit does not mean that we can’t advise people and guide them in the right direction. Where we can, my staff will suggest other suitable mediation services depending on the problem. Increasingly, we get enquiries outside of our jurisdiction which other Ombudsmen and agencies can help with, especially relating to financial and pensions matters”, she added.
Reform starts at home - root and branch overhaul of complaint handling
Throughout 2010, the Office of the Ombudsman underwent a significant structural and process transformation - perhaps the most radical change management project since the Office was established in 1984.
With the full and constructive engagement of the staff and the help of specialist external assistance, we fundamentally overhauled the Office's structure, systems and processes to deliver an even better service to our customers.
Driving efficiency forward, we also engaged with all public bodies under our remit and asked them to help us by providing relevant files and information to the Office within shorter time frames. The assistance of public bodies to date in this respect has been most welcome. We are tracking the effectiveness of the new systems against the backdrop of surging complaint numbers and Exchequer resource constraints.
"I am pleased to record a significant increase in the number of complaints closed as compared to previous years, and a more timely closure of complaints. I wholeheartedly commend my management team and my staff for the “can-do” approach they adopted to designing and implementing the revised structure and processes in such a short space of time. To their credit, they displayed great willingness to embrace very significant change and to work to bring about concrete and verifiable improvements in the service we deliver to the people who come to us for help”.
Government departments and local authorities ignore Ombudsman’s plea to facilitate referrals of their disgruntled complainants to her Office for assistance.
In support of our public awareness programme, we are committed to the widest possible outreach. We want to bring our service to as many people as possible who could benefit from our help in the bureaucratic maze they sometimes have to navigate. With this in mind, I felt it would be genuinely helpful to all members of the public if the websites of the departments and other public bodies within our remit had a proper and accurate link to the Ombudsman website. Back in 2008 my Office reviewed the websites of the public bodies concerned only to find that some had no website linkages and or inadequate or incorrect contact details for my Office.
Since then my Office had written on four separate occasions to those public bodies with poor or non-existent contact information. The response from the majority of the public bodies was positive although not immediate in some cases. Others were not so positive. Having flagged this in my last two Annual Reports and put them on notice, I am now left with no option but to “name and shame”. I have put up a list on our website - at www.ombudsman.ie/ - naming the five government departments and six local authorities - who have ignored what is a simple and cost free request. Just to let their disgruntled complainants know, with full and correct contact information, that they have recourse to my Office’s complaint resolution services and that they have not reached the end of the road.
Commenting Ombudsman O´Reilly said
“Given the drive towards public service reform, the lack of co-operation shown by these bodies, funded by the taxpayer, is both enlightening and disappointing. It illustrates in concrete terms the difficulties members of the public may well have in their dealings with such public bodies, possibly leaving them with no option but to complain to my Office. Feedback from our customer surveys suggests that a growing number of people are accessing the services of my Office through the internet. It is evident then that an important aspect of modern communications is the provision of up-to-date and accurate information, which not only informs the public about the services offered by public bodies but also about how to complain when things seem to have gone wrong and who to complaint to. I don’t think that is too much to ask”.
Twenty- seventh Ombudsman Annual Report
This is Emily O’Reilly´s eighth Annual Report as Ombudsman and the twenty-seventh since the Office of the Ombudsman, the first one in the State, was established back in 1984. Commenting on the record 3,727 complaints made to her in 2010, Emily O’Reilly stated:
“The Ombudsman complaints service is for everyone who needs it, to use free of charge. Since 1984 we have helped over 76,000 people with valid complaints - It is a proud record of achievement. We continue to adapt to changed economic and social circumstances in our efforts to give the best possible service to an increasing number of complainants, within existing resources”.
Who Cares? Report - Commentary
In my Report I have included a commentary on a Special Investigation Report which I laid before the Dáil and Seanad in November 2010. The Report was titled ‘WHO CARES? - An Investigation into the right to nursing home care in Ireland.
My Investigation Report was based on 1,200 complaints received by my Office over 25 years regarding the right to long-term nursing home care for older people. The consistent theme in these complaints is the failure of the then health boards (now the HSE) to provide for older people in public nursing homes, despite there being a legal right to be provided with such care, with the result that many had to avail of expensive private nursing home care. A related complaint theme is that such financial help, as was available towards the cost of private nursing home care, was inadequate.
My Report looked at the rights of older people and the obligations of the then health boards in this care. It also dealt with the role of the then Department of Health and Children which has been promising for many years to develop a new legislative framework for health service entitlement. Despite the Health Act 1970 providing in plain and unambiguous terms that a health board shall make in-patient services, including nursing home care, available, the Department has in recent years argued that this does not confer a right to in-patient services; it argues that while people may be “eligible” for this service, they are not “entitled” to it. I believe that this distinction has no validity and that people are entitled to be provided with in-patient (including nursing home) services.
I concluded my investigation with a finding that the health boards failed to fulfil their obligations to older people under the Health Act 1970 and that this failure came about with the full knowledge and agreement of the Department. In light of the unprecedented financial and economic difficulties facing the country, I did not make a specific recommendation arising from this finding. However, I considered what might be done to assist those people who have suffered significant financial hardship in meeting nursing home costs and made a number of proposals including that the State acknowledge its failures in this area and that some thought be given to providing financial assistance to those who suffered such hardship.
Spotlighting interesting complaints
It is a long-standing practice for Ombudsmen to spotlight in their Annual Reports cases of interest to the general public. The Ombudsman especially likes to highlight those cases which resulted in good outcomes for complainants, or led to systemic change in the manner in which public bodies deliver their services to the public.
While the detail of some cases can be disturbing, nevertheless, it is important to highlight instances where people have been treated unfairly or with a lack of dignity or respect - above all, so that lessons are learned.
For my 2010 Report I have selected 19 case studies, some of which may have resonance or meaning for people with similar problems and experiences. The cases I have chosen to publicise in my Report (all anonymised to protect complainant identity) involve people from all walks of life. Some found themselves in desperate situations and felt badly let down by the system. While most people do not have cause for complaint arising from their interactions with public bodies, the increasing workload of my Office with record number of complaints and people looking for help in 2010 was both exceptional and challenging.
What follows are summarised examples of cases completed in 2010, illustrating the type of complaints we deal with and the outcomes we achieved. They all demonstrate the value of oversight and the tangible benefits delivered by way of redress or remedy for the complainants involved:
Ombudsman Annual Report 2010
Chapter 4: Social Services and Public Healthcare Section - Selected Cases
Department of Social Protection
Case 4.1.1
Department’s decision on social welfare allowances reversed – arrears of €10,785 paid.
Case 4.1.2
€3,348 child benefit arrears paid by Department to Meath mother of disabled child.
Case 4.1.3
Decision of Department of Social Protection to refuse an application for full backdating of a disablement pension for a Garda injured on duty reversed – arrears of €11,178 paid.
Case 4.1.4
Separated wife gets decision refusing application for a one parent family payment reversed - €16,708 arrears paid.
Case 4.1.5
Department reverses decision to refuse child benefit on habitual residence condition grounds - arrears of €1,316 paid.
Health Service Executive (HSE)
Case 4.2.1
HSE refusal to backdate payment of domiciliary care allowance to mother of child with long-term illness reversed - arrears of €24,476 paid.
Case 4.2.2
Complaint about discharge procedures at St. Vincent’s Hospital concerning a chronically-ill homeless man (now deceased) from Bangladesh.
Case 4.2.3
HSE refuses timely dental treatment for Meath man with a medical card.
Case 4.2.4
Complaint by widow about care and treatment of her deceased husband by Beaumont Hospital – Ombudsman praises new procedures and information arrangements and welcomes hospital’s apology to complainant.
Case 4.2.5
Ex gratia payment of €780 made by HSE to elderly couple who had medical cards wrongly withdrawn.
Case 4.2.6
HSE decision on mortgage interest supplement reversed - discretion clause used to pay for 12 months.
Case 4.2.7
Ombudsman congratulates HSE on its handling of the special care needs of a severely disabled young mother.
Case 4.2.8
Elderly patient at a hospital in the HSE South area advised to move to private nursing home after a leg amputation - €6,814 Nursing Home Subvention eventually paid by HSE toward costs following my finding that he was poorly advised.
Case 4.2.9
HSE refunds €8,000 in nursing home charges.
Chapter 5: Local Authorities Section – Selected Cases
Case 5.1
Wicklow County Council refunds part of booking deposit to affordable housing scheme buyer. No such thing as “contingency fee”.
Case 5.2
Limerick County Council reverses decision not to grant waiver for refuse collection charges – couple discriminated against because they had a child.
Case 5.3
Complaint about second property €200 annual charge – how to measure 2km distance from principal residence.
Case 5.4
Couple should not be forced to live with parents – housing application accepted.
Chapter 6: Civil Service Section – Selected Case
Case 6.1
Ex gratia payment of €22,073 made by former Department of Justice and Law reform to Garda widow – emergency tax charged on pension for eight years.
For media inquiries contact:
Dave Glynn - Head of Communications and Research
Tel: 01 6395714 / 087 2361884 email: david_glynn@ombudsman.gov.ie