Foreword
Jump to
The purpose of this consultation document is to seek the opinions of a range of stakeholders on my view that complainants should have direct access to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. I believe that the requirement for MPs to refer someone’s complaint to the Parliamentary Ombudsman restricts the Ombudsman’s ability to provide a fully accessible service to complainants.
If someone is not satisfied with the way their complaint has been dealt with by a government department or a range of other public bodies, they have the right to take their complaint to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. The Ombudsman is empowered by the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967 to investigate complaints from people who have suffered injustice in consequence of maladministration. In simple terms my Office looks at complaints that the UK Government has not acted properly or fairly or has provided a poor service. Where levels of service fall below standard, people have a right to expect a robust and user friendly system for the investigation and resolution of complaints.
The Ombudsman aims to provide an independent, high quality complaint handling service that rights individual wrongs, drives improvements in public services and informs public policy.
Under the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967, complainants can only submit complaints to the Parliamentary Ombudsman through a Member of Parliament (MP). This process is often referred to as the ‘MP filter’. This is not the case for the Health Service Commissioner for England,1 as people with complaints about the NHS have direct access to the Health Service Ombudsman.
I should stress that the support of MPs is key to the independence, authority and effectiveness of the Parliamentary Ombudsman and we are committed to maintaining and developing that relationship.
MPs also play an important role in resolving people’s grievances. However, our experience shows that the MP filter delays the resolution of complaints by the Ombudsman and even deters some people from taking their complaints to the Ombudsman at all. Reforming the MP filter would ensure a modern and directly accessible Ombudsman service, for the benefit of individuals, their MPs and the wider public.
This consultation is taking place now because I am interested to know the views of others on my position that complainants should have direct access to the Parliamentary Ombudsman.
The Law Commission has recently carried out a consultation, Public Services Ombudsmen,2 which suggested a number of changes to the legislation governing public sector ombudsmen in England and Wales, including the reform of the MP filter. The Law Commission’s final report is due to be published in summer 2011. I hope that the responses to this consultation will provide further views and evidence against which the Law Commission’s findings and recommendations can be considered.
In this consultation document I have summarised the origins of the MP filter, the reasons for its introduction in 1967 and the attempts to remove it since. I have also summarised some of the arguments that have been made for retaining the MP filter as well as those that support direct access to the Parliamentary Ombudsman.
Ann Abraham
Parliamentary Ombudsman
June 2011
1 The role of Health Service Commissioner for England, created in 1973, has always been held jointly with that of the Parliamentary Commissioner and the Office holder has become known as the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman.
