The Ombudsman, Emily O'Reilly, has today (15 July 2010) reported to the Dáil and Seanad outlining her experience with the HSE in what she describes as
"a bizarre series of events which involved significant financial and other costs and which, ultimately, resulted in no tangible outcome."
The Ombudsman's report, "Gagging the Ombudsman?", describes what happened in the period July 2008 - June 2009 following the rejection by the HSE of her findings and recommendations in a particular complaint investigation. The report recounts that in November 2008, following a threat by the HSE of a High Court injunction, the Ombudsman felt compelled to withhold from the Dáil and Seanad a special report dealing with the HSE's rejection of her findings and recommendations in the particular investigation; it details also court proceedings initiated by the HSE, and to which the Ombudsman was made a party, which dragged on for seven months with no tangible outcome or benefit to anyone. Ultimately, these proceedings were struck out by the Court with costs awarded to the Ombudsman and other notice parties to be paid by the HSE; these costs, to be paid ultimately by the Exchequer, may have been as high as €150,000.
The Ombudsman describes the overall experience as "frustrating, wasteful, dispiriting and, ultimately, useless ..."; she observes that the HSE's actions suggest a "major lack of ordinary common sense" and questions whether the HSE's actions were, in fact, "designed deliberately to block publication of my investigation report". While the Ombudsman says she cannot answer this question with certainty, she acknowledges that the question does arise.
The original investigation, which gave rise to the events now described by the Ombudsman, was relatively routine; it arose from a dispute regarding fees between the HSE and two agencies providing guardian ad litem services to children involved in child protection proceedings under the Child Care Act 1991. While it is a very rare event that the Ombudsman's findings and recommendations, following an investigation, would be rejected, if it does occur the practice is for the Ombudsman to report on this to the Dáil and Seanad.
The Ombudsman had, in November 2008, prepared such a report for the Dáil and Seanad but, at the very last minute, felt compelled to withhold it under threat of High Court action by the HSE. The Ombudsman comments in her report today that this action by the HSE, effectively preventing her from communicating with the Oireachtas, has to be seen as quite extraordinary. The Ombudsman is now publishing, two years after its completion in July 2008, the original investigation report which prompted such an bizarre response from the HSE. While the HSE has not formally accepted the findings and recommendations of that investigation report, it has in the meantime accepted them in practice and the Ombudsman regards that matter as closed. However, the Ombudsman is now drawing the attention of the Dáil and Seanad to all of these matters.
Both the original Ombudsman's Investigation Report of July 2008, and today's report to the Oireachtas, are now being published on the Ombudsman's website at <www.ombudsman.gov.ie>; in addition, some key items of correspondence passing between the HSE and the Ombudsman's Office during the period in question are being published on the Ombudsman's website.