Warning: The Parliamentary Commissioner

marleyboy

pmduk

vuvuzela wrote: »

And if you posted untrue allegations, it would be you that was sued, not MSE.

It would most likely be both getting sued. And I suspect MSE/Moneysupermarket have a lot more to lose.

oneye14

No one is getting sued as the facts as presented in this thread are in legal terms 'fair comment'. Facts which the Ombudsman has yet to dispute.

The loser here is the Speaker of the House - understood to be the highest officer of Parliament. I also understand he knew about the Ombudsman's "shortcomings" in August 2012, but did not want our MP's to know about it. Since then there have been suggestions to Petition Parliament which would bring it out into the open so to speak.

antrobus

oneye14 wrote: »

No one is getting sued as the facts as presented in this thread are in legal terms 'fair comment'.

Facts? What facts? This thread has been a fact-free-zone to date.

oneye14 wrote: »

Facts which the Ombudsman has yet to dispute.

I could similarly post a claim on a website that (say) Ed Balls is a member of Al-Qaeda, and argue the truth of that allegation on the basis that neither Ed Balls nor Al-Qaeda had taken the time or trouble to dispute it.

oneye14 wrote: »

The loser here is the Speaker of the House - understood to be the highest officer of Parliament. I also understand he knew about the Ombudsman's "shortcomings" in August 2012, but did not want our MP's to know about it. Since then there have been suggestions to Petition Parliament which would bring it out into the open so to speak.

Ah well, if you're trying to s*r*w Bercow, I'm all for it.

oneye14

antrobus wrote: »

Facts? What facts? This thread has been a fact-free-zone to date.

You've not been on Jury service recently have you ??

I could similarly post a claim on a website that (say) Ed Balls is a member of Al-Qaeda, and argue the truth of that allegation on the basis that neither Ed Balls nor Al-Qaeda had taken the time or trouble to dispute it.

A public servant like an Ombudsman cannot ignore exposure of the facts .... I understand the Ombudsman has been asked to remove or change the content of certain pages on her website to stop allegedly mis-leading the public.

molerat

Can someone please give me a clue as to what the OP is actually talking about.

pmduk

Nobody has a clue. In particular the OP themselves.

oneye14

1. The Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration and the Health Service was asked to investigate a Government Dept. which at the moment remains unamed but location is revealed below.

2. Upon investigation, certain factors and facts revealed mandarins within this Government Dept. were being less than honest with the Parliamentary Ombudsman, the Ombudsman's office being accordingly advised. As nothing was done to remedy the situation, the matter was refered to the South Wales Constabulary for the Government Dept. and the City of London Police for the Ombudsman. Understandably the 2 cases were combined into one for the Cardiff Division of the South Wales Constabulary to investigate.

3. In the interim, the Parliamentary Ombudsman was found to have a 'secret pact' with the said Government Dept. and appears to have every right to do so under Section 11 of the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967.

4. Despite investigation by the police, and to date the Parliamentary Ombudsman's 'secret pact' remains intact.

5. The Parliamentary Ombudsman also attempted to block criminal investigations, and succeeded in doing so for several months last year.

Just on the points above, it would appear the reason for the Ombudsman to block a criminal investigation may be to do with this secret pact. The alleged dishonesty within the Government Dept being another issue.
OK ? :money:

oneye14

Apparently we are not the only ones that have little faith in
The Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration and the Health Service:

Review of the Health Service Ombudsman’s approach to complaints that NHS service failure led to avoidable death
available here

This review by Baroness Fritchie, DBE looks at how we respond to some of the most serious complaints we receive: that someone’s death could have been avoided if NHS care or treatment had been better

Note the Parliamentary and the Health Service Ombudsman is the same person.

Have a read - see what you think.
IMO the Ombudsman's office was not in tune with the complaints lodged, or failed to fully understand them.

pmduk

This may be a rant forum, but it would be far more constructive to take this up with your MP. Or are they part of the pact as well?