Introduction
Jump to
During its first forty years, the Parliamentary Ombudsman (PO)1 secured redress for thousands of citizens and, on many occasions, persuaded government departments and other public authorities to tackle administrative weaknesses. In doing so, the Office established a commendable reputation for competence and independence. Yet despite taking on an increasingly important role within the unwritten constitution, it has been criticised in the past for failing to achieve its full potential.2 In response, the objectives and working practices of the Office have been considerably developed and refined. The question that needs to be considered now is how the PO can best contribute in the 21st century to the effective scrutiny of government and the provision of redress.
In addressing this issue, after a brief description of the origins of the PO, this article assesses whether its founding Act, the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967 (‘the 1967 Act’), is still fit for purpose. There have been a number of amendments to the 1967 Act that have expanded the PO's jurisdiction, but its core has remained on the statute book largely unchanged from the original version. The review here will conclude that the 1967 Act has withstood the test of time well, but for some time it has been recognised that an update is necessary if the Office is to make further improvements to its service. Given the past delays in introducing such a reform,3 it is a remarkable coincidence that forty years on from the PO coming into being, not one but two separate revisions of the 1967 Act have received Parliamentary attention in the 2006-07 session.
The first set of proposed reforms follows a 2005 consultation paper issued by the government. This paper recommended the removal of some of the procedural restrictions on the Office's work in order to give proper legal recognition to the manner in which it has evolved.4 A Regulatory Reform Order has been put before Parliament to implement the required amendments.5 At the same time, Parliament is considering the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Bill. During the course of debate on the Bill, attempts have been made to introduce further amendments to the 1967 Act.6 If either measure is passed, this will be an important and positive development which will assist the PO's ability to function in the modern day public sector. With legislative reform now on the government's agenda, this article concludes by examining some of the other key policy issues that currently face the Office and the challenges that lie ahead.
It is an interesting time for the ombudsman community and the administrative justice sector more generally, as the latent potential in alternative redress becomes increasingly recognised. With this in mind, the occasion of the PO's fortieth anniversary is an opportune moment for all interested parties to discuss the PO's existing and future role.7
