My Office has received complaints alleging inequity and unfairness in the administration of the waste waiver scheme being operated by a particular local authority. Having considered the complaints and the issues raised by the complainants together with the view of the local authority concerned, I formed the view that this was not likely to be a matter of concern to the particular local authority alone and that other local authorities face similar issues. I, therefore, decided to carry out a general investigation of the operation of waiver schemes in local authorities.
This investigation report is primarily concerned with highlighting inequity and unfairness in the administration of these schemes with particular attention being focused on the adverse effect on individuals . In my recommendations, I point to some further work that needs to be undertaken by local authorities and by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. For this reason, t he design and implementation of a waiver scheme, either at national or at local level, is not addressed in this report.
I am heartened that the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, to whom I provided an advanced copy of the report, has welcomed the report and accepted that the existing regulatory framework requires modernisation. The Department has also assured me that it will be giving the report and my recommendations the fullest consideration in the context of the ongoing review of the regulation of the whole waste management sector.
Ombudsman’s Powers and Jurisdiction
My powers and jurisdiction, as Ombudsman, are set out in the Ombudsman Act 1980 (as amended). Normally, I do not investigate a complaint unless certain specific criteria are met. Usually there will be a complainant who claims to be adversely affected by an action of a public body listed in the Ombudsman Act 1980 as being a body subject to investigation by the Ombudsman.
Following a preliminary examination of a case, it must appear to me that the action complained of has, or may have, adversely affected the complainant and that the action involved maladministration. In this regard Section 4 of the Ombudsman Act 1980 sets out a range of headings which help to determine whether or not there has been maladministration. I must decide whether the action complained of was, or may have been –
(i) taken without proper authority,
(ii) taken on irrelevant grounds,
(iii) the result of negligence or carelessness,
(iv) based on erroneous or incomplete information,
(v) improperly discriminatory,
(vi) based on an undesirable administrative practice, or
(vii) otherwise contrary to fair or sound administration.
In addition, I have the power under Section 4(3)(b) of the Act to carry out an investigation, on my own initiative, without having received a specific complaint, where such an investigation appears to be warranted.
This is a situation where, although I have received complaints about one local authority only, I have decided to use my powers under Section 4(3)(b) to carry out an investigation into certain aspects of the administration of waiver schemes in other local authorities with a view to highlighting the problems arising, their adverse effect on individuals and making findings and recommendations.
Emily O’Reilly
Ombudsman
October 2008