I thank the Member in charge for all his hard work and for the non-partisan and consensual manner that he has worked with other parties throughout the Bill process.
It has been one of the rare occasions that all parties have generally agreed on a piece of legislation – however I was disappointed that my proposed amendments were unsuccessful.
The Ombudsman has a vital role in ensuring that any member of the public who believes they have suffered injustice through maladministration or service failure by a public body is able to make a complaint with the reassurance that their complaint will be dealt with fairly and independently by the Ombudsman.
To this end, we welcome the extension to his powers within this Bill - but increased power brings increased responsibility with it.
Our unsuccessful Stage 3 amendments included one to ensure that the Ombudsman considers the resources of Town and Community Councils when preparing their model Complaints Handling Procedure, and another to ensure that the Ombudsman takes into consideration the ‘Nolan principles’ applying to the ethical standards expected of public office holders when undertaking investigations into complaints against public bodies. We feel these would have strengthened the Bill.
As I stated at Stage 3, One Voice Wales, representing town and community councils in Wales, has written to me stating that they do have concerns about the model complaints procedure. They further noted that most town and community councils in Wales are incredibly small and employ just one Clerk who would likely work on a part time basis.
I have also received correspondence from the North and Mid Wales Association of Local Councils referring to the Model Complaints procedure on Welshpool Town’s Council Website and recommending that Town Councils can deal with their own complaints in the first instance where they wish to adopt a code in that regard.
I note that the Member in Charge stated at Stage 3 that he has “included some commentary on this issue in the revised explanatory memorandum to the Bill”, but his view “is that that sufficiently addresses the concerns expressed”.
We therefore hope that he is proved correct in this respect.
I also note his statement at Stage 3 that he has “ensured the revised explanatory memorandum now makes it explicit that in holding public office or working in the public sector, the ombudsman and the listed authorities are required to have regard to the Nolan principles”.
We remain of the view that this is critical, where complaints to the Ombudsman frequently relate to matters to which the alleged conduct of officers are integral and at the very least, evidence submitted to the Ombudsman by said officers in relation to these complaints must be considered in the context of potential conflict of interest.
However, we are generally supportive of the Bill before us today and particularly welcome the aspects of this Bill that allow the Ombudsman to initiate his or her own investigations, and increase the mediums by which people can complain, rather than just by writing, thereby creating a more accessible complaints process.