Health and Community Care Committee, 08 Nov 2000

Meeting date: Wednesday, November 8, 2000

Official Report 185KB pdf

---

Public Sector Ombudsman

We come to the final item that will be taken in public, after which we will have a short break before continuing in private.

We are to consider a report entitled "Modernising the Complaints System—Consultation on Public Sector Ombudsmen in Scotland". The introduction and background to this item are explained in the papers that members have in front of them. What is being explored is the establishment of a one-stop shop to which members of the public could direct complaints against the Scottish Executive, the health service and local government.

In the past, we have considered petitions about the complaints system and have noted that we are not happy with the present arrangements. As a member of the Public Petitions Committee, I can say that a great deal of doubt seems to exist about which body people should apply to if they feel that they have not had a good deal from public services in general. There would be a lot to be said for clarification.

Given that a large volume of complaints would be about the health service, how do committee members want to pursue the question? Do we want to take part in the consultation exercise? We have a couple of options. We could hear evidence on the proposals on 13 December and formulate some conclusions, or we could appoint a reporter, who could report back to the meeting on 13 December. A wide range of witnesses is suggested in the paper; I do not think that the committee could cover such a wide range, but it might be within the scope of a reporter to contact and deal with all those people.

What are members' views on the matter?

When will the Scottish Parliament information centre produce a research note on the matter? A research note could take the place of a reporter. I would like to hear evidence, but not from nine different organisations. A SPICe note would be helpful, and I propose hearing evidence rather than appointing a reporter.

The SPICe note will be available by the end of the month, apparently.

I would be interested to hear from the commissioners and the ombudsman, who are incumbent. I have difficulties with the matter. I asked a member of my staff to phone up and get a supply of forms. The response was that we were not allowed to have them and that the constituent must make the application.

I do not think that we should involve the other organisations. They will have to submit evidence as part of the consultation process. Mary Scanlon is right: we cannot go to everybody or we would be here forever. We should narrow our focus to deal with those groups that are involved in the health and social care aspects.

I suggest that the health councils should be involved.

They do not pick up the complaints at this level. We must be careful about that.

I agree with Margaret Jamieson; we should not see all the people on the list. However, bearing in mind the comments that have been made about the complaints process, it would be appropriate to take evidence from a public perspective. That would give us an understanding of how the public perceives the complaints procedure. Anything that we have to say on the matter should be informed by that view.

I know that SPICe is heavily burdened, but it would be useful to commission some research on the situation in other countries. Are there useful suggestions from other countries? We remember when the ombudsman system came into being in Britain, but we hear anecdotally that the public is not over-satisfied with that system. It would be useful to get some information on how complaints are handled in America or Germany.

You might remember when the ombudsman system came into being, Dorothy-Grace, but I think that you speak for yourself.

It is not that long since we stole the system from Sweden.

I agree with what has been said so far, but it would be a mistake not to have the Patients Association represented, as the individual patient is the problem. From the health service commissioner, we will have a view from the centre of how the system is working at the moment. If we also hear from Citizens Advice Scotland, the Scottish Association of Health Councils and the Patients Association, we would hear from a broad section. We should ask whether the group that represents general managers or the group that represents chief executives of trusts could give us a written submission on how they envisage the system interlinking with the current complaints system.

We seem to be adding to the list again. Can we ask all those organisations to submit something in writing? After we have sifted through the submissions, it may well be that we do not need to ask further questions of certain organisations. The list could grow and grow.

We have decided that we want to take evidence. I concur with Margaret Jamieson's suggestion that the best way forward would be to ask for written evidence from all the bodies on the list as well as the Patients Association and the other group that Richard Simpson mentioned. What was its name?

There are two groups: one is a group of chief executives; the other is a group of general managers.

That would cover all aspects. We could return to the matter before 13 December and decide which groups we wish to take oral evidence from. The written evidence would give us a basis on which to make an informed contribution to an important piece of work.

That brings the public part of this morning's meeting to a close.

Meeting continued in private until 13:07